If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Digital Iso question
Been reading about the iso settings and was just wondering what Iso setting
most of you use, I know that it depends on conditions, and equipment but just where do you start seeing noise, read somewhere there is no noticeable difference in 100 and 200, do you find that true in real world situations ? what point do you think I'll shoot but results may not be good. I have all the patience in the world......I just don't have the time to use it ! Gary & Debbie Langley Nature and Wildlife Photography http:\\www.gllangley.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Digital Iso question
GLL artikulierte sich am 17 Okt 2006 wie folgt:
equipment but just where do you start seeing noise, read somewhere there is no noticeable difference in 100 and 200, do you find that true in real world situations ? what point do you think I'll shoot but results may not be good. GLL, for me, it's pretty simple. I use the ISO settings that are necessary for the current conditions: Correlation between speed and aperture. As low as possible and as high as necessary. Fortunately vibrations reduction lenses can help a bit in this matter. And indeed, if 200 is necessary there are no drawbacks. I try to go not above 400 with my Nikons (D2x and D200). But, if the motif is very special, ISO is not the limiting thing. Greets form Germany Thomas |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Digital Iso question
Most of the time, I find myself using 200 ISO but it depends. I use a Canon
20D and image stabilizing lenses so I have a bit more latitude than some. However, I also use 400-800 ISO quite a bit in low light situations. I do a lot of wildlife photo work and much of it is not in the best light conditions and/or I have a subject matter that is moving too quickly for slower shutter speeds and I have to move the ISO up. I've tried moving up from 800 but can see the difference...although, you have to make a choice at times between taking the photo and working with a high ISO or passing on the photo. I always try to get the photo I want. You might want to get some reading material on the relative balances (advantages and disadvantages) of various shutter speed and aperture settings...and ISO settings as well. Then, when you are getting ready to take the photo, you'll know what you have to sacrifice in order to get the proper setting i.e. can you work with a larger aperture and less depth of field, are you okay with a slower shutter speed (is it too slow for you to hand hold, can you use a tripod, is your subject moving or not etc.) and do you really need the sharp detail in the photo that you'll often times loose with higher ISO setting (and the noise issue as well). There are some wildlife shots that I've taken at very high ISO settings but it was the only way I could get the shot...and I dealt with the issues using Photoshop CS2. Also...not all photos are negatively impacted by being soft or having some "noise" present. It all depends....Oh...and one other thing; your ISO, shutter speed, aperture settings will also be impacted by the lens you're using. For instance, if I'm taking a photo of an animal in low light and trying to use my 100-400mm lens, although it has IS, it's has slower glass than my 70-200 IS, with is an f/2.8. The faster glass helps compensate for concerns that I would otherwise have with the camera settings. But, there again, you usually have to sacrifice something....in this example, I had to drop from 400mm to 200mm and take the time to change lenses. One last bit of advice. In between shots (especially if you're doing wildlife work but it's also true with kids, pets etc. that are moving around and you want to get that "great photo" when it presents itself), you should determine what settings you will probably need for that "quick shot" and keep the camera at those settings, only making changes as you have to...but always returning to the "base settings". That way, you are not caught fiddling with the camera settings while your "great shot" opportunity disappears. For instance, when I'm walking the forests and anticipate a fast running critter popping up at any time, I'll have my camera set for such a photo i.e. very fast shutter speed etc. If I stop and take a photo that doesn't require such settings, I make the changes. But, with a quickly moving subject that suddenly appears, I don't want to be caught "flat footed" and fumbling around with my camera. Good quality lenses, fast glass and IS all help a lot...but they're expensive, as you know. Barry "GLL" wrote in message ... Been reading about the iso settings and was just wondering what Iso setting most of you use, I know that it depends on conditions, and equipment but just where do you start seeing noise, read somewhere there is no noticeable difference in 100 and 200, do you find that true in real world situations ? what point do you think I'll shoot but results may not be good. I have all the patience in the world......I just don't have the time to use it ! Gary & Debbie Langley Nature and Wildlife Photography http:\\www.gllangley.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Digital Iso question
Commonly use 200, but would depend on conditions.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Erwin Puts On The Fundamental Differences Between Film and Digital Imaging | Jeremy | 35mm Photo Equipment | 21 | March 19th 06 06:52 AM |
Sigma on D50 - question | TheNewsGuy(Mike) | Digital ZLR Cameras | 7 | March 13th 06 02:48 AM |
Why digital cameras are no good | Scott W | Digital Photography | 0 | April 7th 05 02:00 AM |
NYT article - GPS tagging of digital photos | Alan Browne | Digital Photography | 4 | December 22nd 04 07:36 AM |