High ISO
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
What does /p/ think of using high ISO?
>pic related, 550D at ISO12800
Got this picture just before for you guys.
General opinions and ISO related shit ITT
>inb4 pic not scaled
Just so you can see the 550D noise performance.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS Kiss X4 Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.0 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:06 20:27:38 Exposure Time 1/2000 sec F-Number f/4.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 12800 Lens Aperture f/4.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2716084
I'd rather have a grainy photo of what I want than no photo / a very blurry photo
>>2716084
>What does /p/ think of using large aperture?
>pic related, 550D at f/3.5
>Got this picture just before for you guys.
>General opinions and aperture related shit ITT
Sensitivity is just another variable that should be manipulated to how you want your pictures to turn out.
If you're interested in using super high ISO's that gearfags dare not think about without stroking an A7s, look at Peter van Agtmael's work from Iraq and Afghanistan.
>>2716093
Grain is not the same as noise.
>>2716112
Not him but photo applies to film
And I hear people describe noise as grain all the time, I know its technically wrong but I know what they mean.
I don't mind the results I get with it.
Here's a badly framed shot I took that shows the noise isn't too overpowering. It helps a huge amount to have a camera that deals with high iso well.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 6D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 735 Image Height 1000 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:12:10 14:24:36 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/3.2 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 3200 Lens Aperture f/3.2 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 735 Image Height 1000 Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
ugh
having the D750 which handles ISO so well gives me a ton of options, technically and compositionally
love that fuckin camera
I went from a T3i to a 6D, and jesus mother fuck the ISO performance is (no pun intended) night and day.
It's a seriously huge difference, a lot more than I expected. There was a lot of chromatic noise in the rebel, but that's completely gone in the 6D. And twice the max as the 5DII, not sure bout the mark III.
I can snap at 6400 all day and it's really minimal quality loss.
>>2718784
I went from my 450d which according to Wikipedia is a EOS Rebel XSi to a 6d and I'll never regret it. The 450d was straight up a piece of shit unless everything was perfectly lit.
I ordered a Nikon d3200 on sale (it's like 2 lenses and the body for ~400 on amazon is that good?), did I make a good choice or should I return it and get something else
Pentax K-5. ISO 6400 (12800?), 13mm f/2.8, 1/2s.
Would have preferred a tripod, but I didn't have one with me. Better to have a picture than no picture at all.
Well, except for the horrible noise which sometimes doesn't work out, making you resort to aggressive noise reduction and/or a non-HD final picture.
Sometimes I just go high ISO cuz carrying tripods make me lazy.
>>2716084
It depends on what the final product is going to be.
If I know I'm going to make the finish photo small I don't mind taking a higher iso as re-sizing smaller makes noise disappear.
If I need a large photo for post editing purposes that I would try to either increase aperture and lower shutter speed.
Its always just a balance to find for a picture.
>>2716084
i use to mask the noise with agray/white layer run through ps' noise filter and some gaussian blur.
ISO 1600, highest I can go on my camera
looks surprisingly decent after some very mild noise reduction
I usually avoid going above 400 but decided to give 1600 a go
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 350D DIGITAL Camera Software GIMP 2.8.10 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:12:12 00:16:31 Exposure Time 1/8 sec F-Number f/3.5 ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/3.5 Exposure Bias -1 EV Focal Length 18.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2719004
When I'm too lazy to carry a tripod I keep a long loop of string in my pocket. Loop one end under your foot and hold the other end in your right hand/loop it around a finger. Gently pull the string taut to stabilize.
It's not perfect, but it's much better than nothing when you don't have a tripod on hand.
>>2719004
Hmmm, I like this. Noise and all. I think I am going to try out deliberately noisy photography for a bit and see if I can get tumblr spergs to circle jerk my shit.
>>2719800
You can have "extended" 3200, there is a hack for that (3200 is rarely useful because of noise but it also features other functions like intervalometer or smaller iso steps). I had 350d and this hack was a good thing to have.
I did this one on 350d-1600. 350d sensor was pretty alright for low-light photos, i'm willing to say that in most situations it was "good enough" in entire ISO range - up to 1600.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 350D DIGITAL Camera Software Shotwell 0.20.2 Lens Size 18.00 - 55.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware 1.0.3 Owner Name unknown Serial Number 1230772069 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Left-Hand, Bottom Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi White Point Chromaticity 0.3 Exposure Time 30 sec F-Number f/3.5 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/3.5 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 3453 Image Height 2151 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Evaluative Sharpness Normal Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode Manual Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 288 Camera Actuations 957022252 Color Matrix 0
>>2716084
>What does /p/ think of using high ISO?
Use it when you need it, but the light isn't going to be very good, so your photo had better have a story.
Noise is added to your photo in three stages: Sensor noise, signal gain (ISO) and software noise. ISO works like gain on a microphone, does not improve signal-to-noise ratio but also raises the noise floor. Two of these stages occur in-camera.
Lens sharpness (measured in MTF) matters less than adequate shutter speed to compensate for your hand not being steady, and to freeze motion of the subject when desired.
Therefore, in terms of the cam: Have one that handles noise well, don't up the gain (ISO) unnecessarily, and use an adequate shutter speed combined with a DAMN steady hand.
Most dSLRs today handle ISO well, even my shitty D3200. So get the above right. You won't see notable loss of ISO detail on that camera until ISO 6400 or HI 1. ISO 3200 if you are picky.
It's not a big deal, especially not if you remove the chroma noise and use SPECIALIZED noise reduction plugins like Neat Image or NoiseNinja.
The MTF curve (used to measure lens sharpness) of an image improves when you use software sharpening, but so does noise as software gain. So not only is ISO not a big deal, you can improve the lens sharpness by mastering smart sharpening techniques in, say, Photoshop (NOT Lightroom) and dominating advanced settings for specialized noise reduction software. It will be monochrome noise that is only slightly noticeable and not EVER worth worrying about unless you are printing a 24 MP (6000x4000px) picture taken in a nearly-black environment as a print 60 inches on the long end (100 PPI).
Aesthetically, there is nearly nothing to worry about if your camera technique and your sharpening/noise software technique is good. We are all used to seeing noise both in old photos, current magazines, as an aesthetic effect, and even in some cinematic movies. It doesn't bother anyone but autists.
Enjoy shooting, mate :)
