in between ISO setting on 40D

LCPete

LCPete

Messages
9,835
Edit My Images
Yes
Is it worth using the in between ISO settings ie instead of going from 800 to 1600 use 1000 instead . Is 1000 less noisy than 1600 ?

On a really dull day last week I found that 800 was not enough so used 1600 but 1000 would have given me a high enough shutter speed.

I have always just used the "proper" ISO values as I thought that as the in between ones are interpolated values by the camera not real ISO values they are more noisy, is this right ?
thanks
Pete
 
yes
 
Interesting link Andy, thanks. Looks like i'll be keeping to 160,320,640 and 1250 iso from now on :)
 
Thanks Andy thats really interesting , so I would be best going 160,320,640,800,1000,1250 then 1600
Pete
 
LCPete said:
Is it worth using the in between ISO settings ie instead of going from 800 to 1600 use 1000 instead . Is 1000 less noisy than 1600 ?........Pete
Click to expand...

I often use them if I have to go above ISO 400.......keeping to the theory that you should keep the ISO as low as you can whilst still achieving hand-holdable shutter speeds. They are definitely worth using as far as noise is concerned.
 
It's worth mentioning that using the "cleaner" 2/3 stops does come at a price. Dynamic range will be reduced for these stops and hence there's a decision to be made on whether shadow detail or noise levels are the governing factor for the particular shot your taking....it's possible to clean up the noise in PP but not possible to recover the detail in the shadows.

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
It's worth mentioning that using the "cleaner" 2/3 stops does come at a price. Dynamic range will be reduced for these stops and hence there's a decision to be made on whether shadow detail or noise levels are the governing factor for the particular shot your taking....it's possible to clean up the noise in PP but not possible to recover the detail in the shadows.

Bob
Click to expand...

Thanks Bob it looks like its a good idea to use "normal" steps for lower ISO and inbetween ones for higher ISO to reduce noise
Pete
 
LCPete said:
Thanks Bob it looks like its a good idea to use "normal" steps for lower ISO and inbetween ones for higher ISO to reduce noise
Pete
Click to expand...

It's not quite so simplistic. It's the +2/3 stops where you might see the benefit, the +1/3 stops are almost always going to be noisier than the stop below them.

Bob
 
I didn't know this either, glad it came up on here and was interesting to read the testing!
 
Wow, just tried real life examples this weekend, and found ISO 1600 much less noisy than ISO 1000. Will post examples when I get home this evening ...
 
nickwatson said:
Wow, just tried real life examples this weekend, and found ISO 1600 much less noisy than ISO 1000. Will post examples when I get home this evening ...
Click to expand...

Thats interesting Nick did you try 1250 :)
 
The two photo's that I was going to compare for ISO noise, aren't actually that great for a comparison, however I'll post them anyway. Both are cropped to the same size, and both are taken with the same 70-200 F4 IS. The first is shot at ISO 640 (F5, 1/640 sec). I thought that the noise was excessive when first looking at the photo, hence my interest in this thread.

IMG_5994_cropped.JPG


The second photo was taken this weekend, and was shot at ISO 1600 (F4, 1/1250 sec). I though that this looked less "noisy", so thought that I would compare the two.

IMG_6300_cropped.JPG


I've then tried to repeat the process with a still life, using various ISO settings, and the results were inconclusive.:bang:

Nick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top