Iso.....
- Thread starter 49Clicks
- Start date
TCR4x4
Wishes he had a couple more Inches
- Messages
- 8,852
- Name
- Tom
- Edit My Images
- Yes
49Clicks said:Just a piece of advice really I'm after
When shooting i noticed a major difference in-between iso 250 and 1000 on my 7d.
1000 is almost unworkable on my editing.... Am i missing a trick?
That's how ISO works. It amplifies the sensitivity of the sensor, and in turn creates more digital noise.
Try to stick to the lowest ISO you can, only raise it when you have no option.
Just Dave
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 29,876
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just a piece of advice really I'm after
When shooting i noticed a major difference in-between iso 250 and 1000 on my 7d.
1000 is almost unworkable on my editing.... Am i missing a trick?
If you under expose at any ISO youll see a big change in more grain, try expose to the right a little, obviously from where you are metering at dependant, I shot at 3200 and not much grain, Im sure Ive got a shot that Id inadvertently upped the ISO and dint notice it Ill look see if I can find it
Just Dave
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 29,876
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cant find it the one I meant, but this below is ISO 6400, we were in India and it had a nest hole across from our balcony, it was quite dark, when I took the shot not the best but this owlet is about 7" tall 20ft away, OK it has got grain but acceptable I think in this case
Spotted Owlet Baga Goa India by Just Daves Photos, on Flickr
Spotted Owlet Baga Goa India by Just Daves Photos, on Flickr
- Messages
- 2,748
- Name
- Stuart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Depends on how much the OP is cropping I suppose. Pixel peeping at ISO 1000 is pretty grainy on my 7D. Resizing the whole image for web however is not a problem.
- Messages
- 5,000
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just a piece of advice really I'm after
When shooting i noticed a major difference in-between iso 250 and 1000 on my 7d.
1000 is almost unworkable on my editing.... Am i missing a trick?
You need to post an image cropped at 100% or a link to a full size image.
.
daventryh said:And where in Eastleigh did you consume this wonderful curry?
I also live in Eastleigh
The great mongollu or what ever they are called. Do not have a korma! It has completly trashed me. Post photos shortly
- Messages
- 142
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
u8myufo, where did you take those images and do you know the name of the animal in the first two images?
TCR4x4
Wishes he had a couple more Inches
- Messages
- 8,852
- Name
- Tom
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Paul_Westhead said:
Looks a bit like a Pallas cat. Gorgeous creatures.
I took one at Cotswold wildlife park
Pallas Cat by TCR4x4, on Flickr
- Messages
- 19,354
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As Tom rightly mentions they are indeed Pallas Cats and taken at Cotswold.
- Messages
- 19,354
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The thing is Gregg noise can be a problem sometimes, I would not say it does not exist, but it seems to crop it`s ugly head up when you least expect it. As with everything else there are so many variables. The combination of which WB you choose, picture style, ISO, how you expose the shot and the subtle differences in light at the time of day you take it all imo play a part in it. I have taken bird shots @400mm on a fairly bright cloudy day, thought about upping the ISO and the image has turned out really crap with noise. Take the snake shot for example, indoors no flash and a shutter of 1/25 and end up with a reasonable image
Is the 7D fairly new to you Gregg? If so then if you have not already done so take a look for in camera settings to use, first one being turn off noise reduction in camera.
Last edited:
u8myufo said:The thing is Gregg noise can be a problem sometimes, I would not say it does not exist, but it seems to crop it`s ugly head up when you least expect it. As with everything else there are so many variables. The combination of which WB you choose, picture style, ISO, how you expose the shot and the subtle differences in light at the time of day you take it all imo play a part in it. I have taken bird shots @400mm on a fairly bright cloudy day, thought about upping the ISO and the image has turned out really crap with noise. Take the snake shot for example, indoors no flash and a shutter of 1/25 and end up with a reasonable image
Yes new to me only ha it a few weeks. Excuse short messages am negociating the m25
- Messages
- 19,354
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cheers Michael, take your Kittiwake and Christmas day Turnstone for example.You are not going to get much better than that for detail, the Turnstone could have done with a bit more DOF but still very good quality. No doubt we have all questioned our shots, why some come out better than others. Like I have said before imo it is all down to the light. Studio photographers control their light, they understand and know what they are aiming for, wedding photographers have a good knowledge of light, flash and how to control it. If you want to take biird shots for instance you do not have that unless you are doing it on a professional level and going for specific shots which may need a setup of multiple flashes, so we work with whatever light we got and have to adjust countless settings sometimes to achieve decent results. The 7D does produce noise like I say and is imo not so good as a lot of the Nikons
( No I dont need a blindfold thanks just shoot me in the back ) 
However in saying that it can be controlled and lets be honest the majority of us are only doing this for pleasure so there is no harm done.
- Messages
- 142
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cheers guys.
- Messages
- 586
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Are you checking your histogram and checking that is it exposed to the right? see you could be underexposing your images and trying to drag detail out that wasnt fully caught in capture and creating some noise in post ?
I often use ISO1600 and don't find much grain as long as I'm getting the other settings right. One thing thou i did read about the 7d is that for the ISO you are better sticking to a number that is a multiple of 160, a multiple of 250 I'm told is the worse you can use. Stick to 160, 320, 640, 1600, 3200 and see how that goes
Im not %100 sure if this is true, there was a thread on it on a forum not so long ago, maybe even this one but either way exposing to the right, keeping it a touch over if need be so you dont have to drag out detail might help.
I often use ISO1600 and don't find much grain as long as I'm getting the other settings right. One thing thou i did read about the 7d is that for the ISO you are better sticking to a number that is a multiple of 160, a multiple of 250 I'm told is the worse you can use. Stick to 160, 320, 640, 1600, 3200 and see how that goes
Im not %100 sure if this is true, there was a thread on it on a forum not so long ago, maybe even this one but either way exposing to the right, keeping it a touch over if need be so you dont have to drag out detail might help.
- Messages
- 14,759
- Name
- Laura
- Edit My Images
- No
Cheers Michael, take your Kittiwake and Christmas day Turnstone for example.You are not going to get much better than that for detail, the Turnstone could have done with a bit more DOF but still very good quality. No doubt we have all questioned our shots, why some come out better than others. Like I have said before imo it is all down to the light. Studio photographers control their light, they understand and know what they are aiming for, wedding photographers have a good knowledge of light, flash and how to control it. If you want to take biird shots for instance you do not have that unless you are doing it on a professional level and going for specific shots which may need a setup of multiple flashes, so we work with whatever light we got and have to adjust countless settings sometimes to achieve decent results. The 7D does produce noise like I say and is imo not so good as a lot of the Nikons
Thanks Rich, the 7d will no doubt be much better than my 30d, I don't find 3200 usable, so that would be a handy improvement.
Interesting to see the comment about intermediate iso's I remember having that pointed out to me in the past, can't remember where though.
- Messages
- 3,914
- Name
- Stuart or just Stoo!
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I regularly had my ISO up to 1600 when I was using my 7D and didn't have much of a problem with excess noise, unless it was either under or over exposed.
I honestly can't see any reason to keep the ISO in a multiple of 160, but that may well be true. I had my ISO increased in 1/3 stops and 1/2 stops at various times and can't say I noticed too much difference, but if anyone cares to elaborate further please do, it would be interesting to know.
- Messages
- 327
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The thinking is that some cameras only support whole stops of ISO in hardware, and the intermediate ISOs are done by digitally scaling the values from the next stop up. I can't find it now, but somewhere online there's a scientific paper on the subject. They compared something like a 30D and a 5D. The whole ISO stops had lower noise on the 30D, but it made no difference on the 5D.
- Messages
- 9,940
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I used to do this on my 40D worked really well, ISO 640 had the same noise level as 400 but did read that its not worth doing on the 7D
as already said getting the exposure right is important at higher ISO's
- Messages
- 19,354
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well here is an article that explains a little about ISO. The guy updates his thread and states " I am at a loss now
i receive messages from other 7D users that, on the contrary, only whole ISO numbers should be used
I think ive lost my own thread
"
Also take a look here which should help explain things to those who are scratching their heads about it notice how the test from marvelfilms above is quoted as being mis- analysed :shrug:
Also take a look here which should help explain things to those who are scratching their heads about it
notice how the test from marvelfilms above is quoted as being mis- analysed :shrug:
- Messages
- 9,940
- Edit My Images
- Yes
THis explains it very well copied from the post by panopeeper
from the thread on the link posted by Rich
(hope its OK to post this )
quote =
" ISO 320 is actually ISO 400, *overexposed*. This does not limit the dynamic range (nor does HTP increase it), it only “shifts” it.
The effect of using ISO 320 is the very same as using ISO 400 with +1/3 EV bias. Of course the higher exposure leads to lower noise – but it leads to clipping sooner.
Cheers
Gabor"
from the thread on the link posted by Rich
(hope its OK to post this )
quote =
" ISO 320 is actually ISO 400, *overexposed*. This does not limit the dynamic range (nor does HTP increase it), it only “shifts” it.
The effect of using ISO 320 is the very same as using ISO 400 with +1/3 EV bias. Of course the higher exposure leads to lower noise – but it leads to clipping sooner.
Cheers
Gabor"
- Messages
- 3,914
- Name
- Stuart or just Stoo!
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Marvellous links Rich, certainly is a hell of a lot more to pulling out a camera and pressing a few buttons. I'll remember to keep my ISO on 'full stops' or '1/3 pulled' from now on. I think it'll be more of a concern on my 60D rather than my 5D3 though as the latter handles noise levels excellently anyway. It's always good to know all the tips and tricks for better photos though. Many thanks.