Why so high ISO?!

topcatproduction

topcatproduction

Messages
500
Edit My Images
Yes
With decent lenses being as low as f/2.8 and primes even lower, why do people seem to use such high ISO now? I know I'm not a pro but with my 400D I used to keep it on 100 and only went up to 400 when dull, 800 a couple of times when very dim but with a large aperture it worked!

Is it more so you can use a fast shutter speed as well for sharper images, or is it because noise technology has moved on and there is very little visible difference between ISO 100 and say 800 on a good camera?

I'm expecting a 40D to arrive, is there any point me trying to use ISO 100 wherever I can or is there no point nowerdays and leave it at 400 even for bright light?

I haven't had enough experimenting to get all the answers I'm after !!!! :shrug:
 
Unless you're using flash and need to throw the light further use the lowest iso you can get away with. At f/2.8 in your average room you'll still only get about 1/50th at iso 400. That might be enough to nail decent sharpness if nobody is moving and your focal length is short enough, but often it's nevessary to up it a bit. You'll find the 40d has WAY better high iso performance than the 400d.
 
Depends what you are shooting. Fast moving objects (birds, planes, motorsport) you NEED high ISO to freeze the movement. For landscapes you should use low ISO to get the detail.
 
are you shooting static or moving items in your images!? if static as long as the DOF is good and you can hold it steady then speed is not important... now add moving items to a situation where you need to shoot at smaller than f/2.8 and you'll find you get underexposed images. ISO to a point corrects that underexposure .
 
for people in all but the worst light I tend to stick at 1/125 (or lots higher) aperture f2 (stop down sometimes for DoF) then let the iso be where it wants to. Don't think about it until 1600 tbh and have no objections about 3200 outdoors tends to be 100 or 200
 
When using long lenses a high shutter speed may be required to freeze motion if shooting birds or the like, when using my 90-250 I want to use a minimum of 1/1000 sec shooting birds to prevent blur, in the winter daylight or in shadowed areas often I'm using ISO's up to 3200 even at f2.8, but the quality and noise levels are still acceptable.

Paul
 
Sounds like what I thought but with more detail- thanks!

I guess what I'm wondering really is: is there any point going down to 100 in the sunny outdoors or can I just leave it at say 400 to save changing it all the time? (Not that its much effort to change :lol:)
 
Use the lowest ISO you can! Try 100ISO in a theatre shooting stage pictures! Then you'll know why we need good quality at 3200ISO - and above!
 
topcatproduction said:
Sounds like what I thought but with more detail- thanks!

I guess what I'm wondering really is: is there any point going down to 100 in the sunny outdoors or can I just leave it at say 400 to save changing it all the time? (Not that its much effort to change :lol:)
Click to expand...

its an easier button on the 40d ;) Won't make a massive difference IQ wise but up to you
 
Rather than using the lowest ISO possible, for best results try using the native ISO of your camera's sensor rather than one of the extended ones. The native sensitivity is usually the lowest available without being shown as "Lo1" or similar. The extended "Lo" settings are there so you can (if you want or need to) use smaller apertures or longer shutter speeds without using Neutral Density filters.

It can be hard to see the difference between shots at ISO 200 and ISO 800 once printed, even to A4 or bigger, especially on the current lot of sensors. Even shots at higher ISO settings are perfectly useable, even if they do appear noisy when pixel peeping.
 
The only true answer is to try it for yourself.

I did this last weekend by photographing the back of a stationary car at all ISO levels from 100 to 3200(H) on my 40d.

On the bodywork of the car (silver) I noticed very little diffference once ISO was at 400 or slower. At higher ISO levels, the level of noise started to show and became a little too bad at 3200 for my taste.

However, the gotcha came when looking at the black soot inside the exhaust. And this is where I noticed differences even at 200 ISO.

So it all depends on what level of noise you are prepared to compromise with, how large you blow up the image and whether you pixel peep of print onto paper.

In the end, if it is a choice between a well exposed shot with your preferred DoF and a little bit of noise, or a shaky shot with blurred images, then it is a no-brainer. Ramp up the ISO if the image demands it.
 
I guess I've just for some reason thought it is a sin to put the iso up unless you really need it but as you say- better to have a well exposed picture than blurry one! Need to get out of my anti high ISO habit :help:
 
topcatproduction said:
I guess I've just for some reason thought it is a sin to put the iso up unless you really need it but as you say- better to have a well exposed picture than blurry one! Need to get out of my anti high ISO habit :help:
Click to expand...

Very true! You can apply noise reduction to an image, but if it's motion blurred you'll never get the detail back!
 
topcatproduction said:
I guess I've just for some reason thought it is a sin to put the iso up unless you really need it but as you say- better to have a well exposed picture than blurry one! Need to get out of my anti high ISO habit :help:
Click to expand...

I think that's the right approach :)

I normally shoot at ISO 100 for landscapes, but the camera is usually sitting on a tripod.
When I'm walkabout with the dogs, the default ISO was 200 (on a 1Ds MKII), but since I've got a 1DS III (similar sensor to the 40D), my default walkabout ISO is 500, it covers most bases, I know the image will be sharp whatever the light.
 
DonnaM said:
Depends what you are shooting. Fast moving objects (birds, planes, motorsport) you NEED high ISO to freeze the movement. For landscapes you should use low ISO to get the detail.
Click to expand...

For fast moving objects its fast shutter speed that freezes the movement not the iso, it just means you might have to up the iso to get the shutter speed you need to use :thumbs:
 
because nightclubs have very little light



topcatproduction said:
With decent lenses being as low as f/2.8 and primes even lower, why do people seem to use such high ISO now? I know I'm not a pro but with my 400D I used to keep it on 100 and only went up to 400 when dull, 800 a couple of times when very dim but with a large aperture it worked!

Is it more so you can use a fast shutter speed as well for sharper images, or is it because noise technology has moved on and there is very little visible difference between ISO 100 and say 800 on a good camera?

I'm expecting a 40D to arrive, is there any point me trying to use ISO 100 wherever I can or is there no point nowerdays and leave it at 400 even for bright light?

I haven't had enough experimenting to get all the answers I'm after !!!! :shrug:
Click to expand...
 
I was shooting a football match under floodlights the other night, the minimum shutter speed I'd use for footy is 1/640th, with my 70-200 f2.8 I was using ISO's between 2000-3200.

I also shoot quite a few gigs at small, dark venues, I've had to use 6400 in the past, it's not brilliant, but better than being blurry!

Dave
 
Very interesting thread this one, well done for the responses, makes good sense now :)

thx

Dazza
 
Basically I think that, for most people, high ISO capability is just a feature rather than a real benefit - like all of the games and unusable ringtones on a mobile phone.

The 'best' ISO setting is always the native ISO, which is usually 100 or 200 on a DSLR and there will always be a quality loss if a higher (or lower) setting is used, so only use high ISO if you really need to.

I also feel that today's crop of photographers, who have only ever shot on digital, have learned instead of being taught and often can't hold a camera steady during long exposures, which makes high ISO more useful to them than to 'old school' people.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Basically I think that, for most people, high ISO capability is just a feature rather than a real benefit - like all of the games and unusable ringtones on a mobile phone.

The 'best' ISO setting is always the native ISO, which is usually 100 or 200 on a DSLR and there will always be a quality loss if a higher (or lower) setting is used, so only use high ISO if you really need to.

I also feel that today's crop of photographers, who have only ever shot on digital, have learned instead of being taught and often can't hold a camera steady during long exposures, which makes high ISO more useful to them than to 'old school' people.
Click to expand...

Am a big fan of Garry ;), but when shooting weddings, low(er)-noise with high ISO's, which Canon and Nikon seem to be concentrating on more than more mega-pixels, is a good thing IMHO. I certainly can't compare this with unused ringtones on a mobile phone,,,,Sorry Garry.
 
NigelPaul said:
Am a big fan of Garry ;), but when shooting weddings, low(er)-noise with high ISO's, which Canon and Nikon seem to be concentrating on more than more mega-pixels, is a good thing IMHO. I certainly can't compare this with unused ringtones on a mobile phone,,,,Sorry Garry.
Click to expand...
I have a wind machine but didn't know I had any fans:lol:
I agree, weddings do require high ISO for indoor shots. They are one of the few exceptions, simply because it's better to get a noisy shot than no shot at all.
 
A technique I sometimes use with telephotos lenses when photographing birds is to set the camera to manual mode and select the shutter speed and aperture I want to use and have the ISO set to auto and let the camera choose the correct ISO value, that way I know the shutter speed and aperture are correct and if the shot demands a high ISO for correct exposure then so be it. I don't have many problems with noise or IQ even at high (3200) ISO values for these kinds of shots, shooting in RAW allows more latitude to remove noise and enhance the shot in PP if required.

Paul
 
Woofmix said:
A technique I sometimes use with telephotos lenses when photographing birds is to set the camera to manual mode and select the shutter speed and aperture I want to use and have the ISO set to auto and let the camera choose the correct ISO value, that way I know the shutter speed and aperture are correct and if the shot demands a high ISO for correct exposure then so be it. I don't have many problems with noise or IQ even at high (3200) ISO values for these kinds of shots, shooting in RAW allows more latitude to remove noise and enhance the shot in PP if required.

Paul
Click to expand...

My Canon will only go up to 400ISO in Manual when AUTO IS0 is set. Is there a way to overide this?
 
NigelPaul said:
My Canon will only go up to 400ISO in Manual when AUTO IS0 is set. Is there a way to overide this?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you'll need to take it off auto ISO and then when you find your shutter speed gets too low increase your ISO (if you can't increase your apperture to get a faster speed or if you need it closed down for effect).
 
NigelPaul said:
My Canon will only go up to 400ISO in Manual when AUTO IS0 is set. Is there a way to overide this?
Click to expand...

I don't know about Canon but mu Oly E3 has an option to select the range of Auto ISO you want it to use, I set mine to go from ISO 100 - 3200 but the default was up to 800 ISO if I remember correctly.

Paul
 
I'm pretty sure you'll need to take it off auto ISO and then when you find your shutter speed gets too low increase your ISO (if you can't increase your apperture to get a faster speed or if you need it closed down for effect).
Click to expand...
Cheers Gareth;)
I do realise that, only that I noticed the OP has a Canon, and therefore Wolfmix's post, who uses an Olympus may fox the OP.

I asked if you could overeride, simply because I heard somewhere you could, and wondered if anyone knew if this was true.
 
Garry Edwards said:
I have a wind machine but didn't know I had any fans:lol:
Click to expand...

When I say fan, I meant to say someone I respect a lot rather than in the context of my 13 year old daughter being a fan of JLS etc. ;)
 
Garry Edwards said:
Basically I think that, for most people, high ISO capability is just a feature rather than a real benefit - like all of the games and unusable ringtones on a mobile phone.
Click to expand...

Very much disagree - high ISO is freeing photographers to be better than they could be previously. Obviously this only applies to certain aspects of photography - you dont need to be above native iso on a tripod for instance!
where high ISO helps:
- Sports; Allows togs to stay at high enough shutter speeds to freeze the action, even indoors. Many photos in the paper from night football look quite grainy because they are shot at high ISO... as the tech improves, the image quality is improving dramatically mking for better pictures.
- Street photography; high ISO allows shots in dull days, dark side streets etc that were not previously as easy to achieve.
- Nature photography.... Recently heard Andy Rouse, one of britains top pro nature photogs, speak about how the new Nikon D3S with its mindblowing highISO images has transferred his photography, made him a better shooter, and rejuvinated his love for photography. He spoke of how he rarely goes below ISO 800 with that camera, because there is no point... it allows him very fast shutter speeds on bright days, and so maximises the sharpness in his photos.

There is a rewason Nikon are still making 12MP cameras (even their pro bodies) when Canon are going up to 16-18MP.... It has allowed them to make the best highISO cameras out there, and that is winning them fans. HighISO is the future of SLR photography!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top