🌟QUICK QUESTION: Do you say Eye-Soh or do you say Eye-S-Oh?
@JKAdams
Жыл бұрын
Either
@redeemerpresbyteriandesmoines
Жыл бұрын
Gosh, never thought of this before. I think I say it both ways.
@Axonteer
Жыл бұрын
Iiiih so... im swiss (german speaker) ... i say it as a word not as I.S.O :D
@MarkDenneyPhoto
Жыл бұрын
@@BetchelVisuals But, how do YOU say it?
@tjsinva
Жыл бұрын
Both. 😎
@kevins8575
Жыл бұрын
As a bird photographer, I lost my fear of high ISO a long time ago. Current noise correction software is now standard practice.
@davehemprich-bennett9336
Жыл бұрын
Heh, yep. It’s kinda funny to hear landscape photographers getting twitchy about going above base ISO, while we’re using shutter speeds >2,000/second and leaving auto ISO to do what it has to do
@christophergrove4876
Жыл бұрын
EXACTLY... I don't know how many bird shots I've lost because of motion blur. I now often set my ISO to Auto (with a minimum shutter speed).
@jerrykita8767
Жыл бұрын
Exactly how I think about bird photography.
@Bernard-ux2eb
Жыл бұрын
AI based denoising is a modern marvel.
@jaybeckerich
Жыл бұрын
Agree. Doing wildlife- rather have shutter speed than a low iso.
@DMurdock
Жыл бұрын
I find that noise is only really a problem when you make an image look brighter than it actually is. But outside of that, a lot of the time the grain actually looks aesthetically pleasing. The fear of noise is a learned behavior. Non-photographers either don't notice it, or they like how it looks.
@AJ-em2rb
Жыл бұрын
funny because higher ISO (in digital cameras) is literally just telling the camera to make an image brighter than it is. but sometimes it's just a necessity
@aprilthunder
8 ай бұрын
"IT DOESN'T MATTER" Not! It also depends on how large your camera sensors is. It's not good to assume that everyone has a large sensor in his/her camera, and can get away with the graininess in high ISO settings. What might look acceptable at ISO 3200 in a full-frame digital camera might not look good if your sensor is much smaller.
@DMurdock
8 ай бұрын
@@aprilthunder I use a crop sensor
@cheeeeezewizzz
5 ай бұрын
@@aprilthunderViewers don't care no matter how bad the noise is. Ive sold, in the last year, 35mm film prints that were pushed 3 stops in processing. To put that in perspective, if any m43 camera could be pushed to 51200 iso, it would still have less noise than the film photos I sold. Nobody care. Only losers who stare at their pc whining about the pixel counts and 100% zooming all their images constantly care. Nobody will ever look at your images that way. It doesn't matter what camera it is. Nobody give a fuck about noise. Imbecile.
@account-pending-deletion
Жыл бұрын
Outside of portrait photography, I just use whatever ISO fits the shutter speed and aperture I need. I can't think of a single instance where I've taken a properly exposed photo and thought "this is unusable because of light noise" but I can think of PLENTY of times where I've had an unusable photo because my shutter speed was too low
@veda9151
Жыл бұрын
When I begin to shoot stage performances, I learn to live with very noisy photos if it means I can actually capture the moment.
@ajamudc
Жыл бұрын
I agree. I've started to use more manual shooting with Auto ISO for that exact reason. I can adjust the aperture and shutter speed for the creative effects and my ISO can adjust as needed. Like you, I would rather have a sharp photo with a bit of noise than a blurry photo.
@alexzhang9318
Жыл бұрын
It works for most of the scenarios - aperture priority + auto ISO
@InteractiveDNA
Жыл бұрын
There is the confusion many makes. In digital cameras you ONLY have two settings to proper exposure your photos ( Aperture and Shutter Speed) the ISO is a Gain Controller that increases the frequency after the photo is taken. Your goal is to use RAW and use a computer to control the amount of gain there, but there will many scenarios that you will need the Shutter Speed fast to freeze a moment and putting aside the ISO is key and even letting the camera choose it automatically so you concentrate on the exposure. See!!! There is only TWO settings on ALL cameras the you control light and everything else are processing power after the photo has been taken. Taking a photo with a super high ISO you will be processing the gain on camera and it will be worse than adjusting the gain on a more powerful computer. AI is changing everything
@coltoncyr2283
Жыл бұрын
Try macro. You lose SO much light. That's why having a flash is a MUST or you're at iso 1000. With modern cameras iso 1000 actually isn't that bad!
@aedreezy
Жыл бұрын
I actually got over the whole "Never go above 100-200 ISO" when I got into Film photography. When I saw that Film "speeds" were actually the equivalent of ISO on digital cameras, I thought, "Oh - if people have been using up to 3200 ISO for years on film, then why should I care?" Now I set my camera to Aperture priority, which is something I never did my first 4 years of photography - and now I love shooting digital again, haha
@williamblaker2628
Жыл бұрын
My father began teaching me photography back in the 1970s when I was a kid. He was a professional photographer, an author of photography books back then, as well as working at the university. He taught me to pronounce each letter: I.S.O., so that's how I've continued to say it. However, I never think about anyone being incorrect if they pronounce it EYE SO. I get that it saves a syllable when speaking. Neither way is right or wrong. We all understand each other, either way. As far as shooting considerations, I usually set my camera either to aperture priority or to shutter priority, depending on what I'm trying to achieve. Then, I choose the lowest ISO that I can, so long as I achieve the image that I want. I mainly photograph two types of subjects: birds or botany. Birds demand a fast shutter speed; for botanical photos aperture is more important. My camera is a Nikon D850 which doesn't handle ISO noise as well as the newer cameras, so I start to see noise at around ISO 800. However, I value a sharp bird image more than I care about ISO noise. I can fix ISO noise with an AI denoise program, to some extent. My preference is to shoot at an ISO below 800, but I occasionally need to grab a poorly illuminated bird at ISO 2,400 in a shady forest. However, a few days ago I was photographing wildflowers on a windless day in good light, and I had the luxury of using ISO 100 at f/1.4 to f/2.8 and the images came out gorgeous. For botanical shots it's oftentimes desirable to get good separation of the subject (say, a flower, or a seed pod) from the "cluttered" background of leaves, grasses and twigs, so a wide aperture does the trick. In those cases, the shutter speed only needs to be fast enough to eliminate shutter vibration, or a swaying subject. Oftentimes, I'll use something to hold the plant steady, like a clip, or my free hand, if it's breezy. Sometimes, I'll use my hat, held out-of-frame, to block the breeze. Long story, short: shutter speed & aperture are the primary considerations. After those are decided upon, then factor in using the lowest ISO I can get away with to create a clean, vibrant image. With my camera, a lower ISO does make a prettier image than a higher ISO. Better color and more detail in the shadows, with smoother tonality. My friends who shoot with the latest high-end mirrorless cameras enjoy much better ISO performance than I can get away with. My Nikon D850 is a good camera with lots of great features, but not so great at high ISOs.
@draughonc
Жыл бұрын
Set Aperture to desired depth of field, then set Shutter to min. fastest to get sharp focus, then ISO to level needed to expose correctly. Remembering that as light dims, you don't need to stick at f11. Its okay to open it up.
@Dustyphoto915
Жыл бұрын
Set auto ISO and you only have to perform the first two steps. Set your max ISO you are comfortable with for that shoot. And then let the computer brain worry about the gain. Love it.
@drmathochist06
Жыл бұрын
It's "Eye-Soh". The International Organization for Standardization specifically picked the *Greek word* "ISO" rather than an acronym that couldn't be correct for all languages.
@pjay3028
Жыл бұрын
Isn't it the acronym for International Standards Organisation?
@drmathochist06
Жыл бұрын
@@pjay3028 No, it's specifically not, because that wouldn't be international! In English, the body you're thinking of is the "International Organization for Standardization".
@suedenim9208
Жыл бұрын
Right. And as we all know, the Greeks had a habit of capitalizing entire words, and anglicizing the pronunciation long before there we any Anglos around.
@suedenim9208
Жыл бұрын
@@pjay3028 A bit yes, and a tiny bit no. It's not really an acronym because the official name is The International Organization for Standardization. Because they have (or had when formed) three official languages there wasn't really one single name so they adopted a slight variation of the English name and went with ISO. That's according to the only guy who was involved with founding the organization and also talked about the name.
@bigdaftorangedog
Жыл бұрын
I heard somewhere recently that "ISO" is actually a word and not an abbreviation or an acronym - since then I've been in the "eye-so" camp. On a somewhat-related note I recently came into a "new" old Canon EOS 1DS Mark II (shutter count of 200) which allows for expanded ISO with a low end of 50. I thought hey why not but was very disappointed with the results. Turns out it's some sort of electronic enhancement so it's definitely not the sharpest ISO setting on the camera. Won't do that again - live and learn I guess. Keep up the great work, Mark - I have learned so much from your videos over the years!
@markspurgeon8084
Жыл бұрын
I thought it stood for International Standardisation Organisation however I suppose all words have an origin and maybe an acronym can morph into a word and get recognition in a reputable dictionary.
@secretrat
Жыл бұрын
Noise isn't the problem from increasing ISO, and what little there is can be easily dealt with in post. But take a series of shots at a color checker target, keeping aperture constant and increasing ISO and shutter speed to keep the exposure constant. Load all the images as layers in Photoshop and watch the color histogram as you move from layer to layer, from low ISO to high ISO. You will see a flattening of the peaks and an overall "muddying" of the color. Depending on your camera, you might also see a color shift on the middle gray patch. So you are right in a way. Don't fear noise and use your ISO dial to get the shot you want. But be aware that doing so impacts the color, maybe more than you would like.
@alansach8437
Жыл бұрын
Once again, noise and muddy colors, or a blur of that once in a lifetime opportunity? The choice is clear to me. If I have a sharp image I can always work with the color and noise. If it's blurry, it's blurry. Delete! I've been there. No, no, no! Can't go past 800 or 1000, or whatever arbitrary number I had in my head. Put the photos on the computer...blur, blur, more blur! Shots I couldn't get back!
@arnantos
Жыл бұрын
Yes, I think the concerns to use low ISO is back when we were still using film. Back then we have to plan what film ISO we are going to use for the photo session, otherwise we bring many cameras with different ISO films. Since changing ISO was difficult that day, obviously we need to plan what kind of photo session we are going to shoot. It was common to use ISO 100 for landscapes and nature and higher ISO for sport events. Nowadays with current digital photography technology, we can even have the auto setting to make the camera (designer) decide which is best for the shoot. The technology also made less noise for higher ISO, and also to filter the noise.
@mrc1ark528
Жыл бұрын
Came here to say this... the fear is a relic of the chemical process which inherently caused high grain in the finished product.
@gromitdaddy
Жыл бұрын
I think us older photographers who grew up with A.S.A. tend to lean more towards I.S.O., where younger ones who grew up with ISO use Eyeso
@larrycitra300
Жыл бұрын
I agree … was just thinking the same thing. Seriously though, ISO is an abbreviation, not a word!
@BGTuyau
Жыл бұрын
The generational difference and the ASA precedent probably is the best account for the pronunciation difference.
@gibmebalut
Жыл бұрын
@@larrycitra300 it’s an abbreviated word.
@davidthefat
Жыл бұрын
You aren’t saying ASA isn’t Ah Sah! 😂 ISO is an organization, whose name is an acronym
@gibmebalut
Жыл бұрын
@@davidthefat the organization is called the International Organization for Standardization. It’d be “IOS”. They decided to name their organization an abbreviated form of the Greek, “isos”.
@andreask.6872
Жыл бұрын
First of all, as a photographer from Germany, I pronounce ISO Eehzo :-) I always shoot - with very few exceptions - with the ISO Auto setting. However, I usually have this limited to ISO 1600. Beyond that, the noise increases significantly with my Canon APS-C cameras.
@dreamflight5637
Жыл бұрын
With my Sony a7riv I often shoot at iso 6400 and it is still usable. Nice to have FF I guess.
@majkiboy86
Жыл бұрын
Same deal here, Shutter and Aperture manual with auto iso limiter to 100-12800 with expo -0.3 and it works fine.
@YariJaluff
Жыл бұрын
@@dreamflight5637 I have the same camera and for me above 1600 colors are not the best, sharpening is lost and noise appears without pixel peeping. I always try to use ISO 1250 or less
@videojeroki
Жыл бұрын
which canon apsc do you have? My old Canon 450D still give good result at iso 1600 with noise reduction is post.
@SilverLarry
Жыл бұрын
Another important thing to know is if your camera has a dual native ISO sensor, and if so, determine what that second ISO setting is. The second ISO is always less noisy than the 2 or 3 ISO stops lower. So knowing that will help you get better results. Most camera manufacturers use dual native sensors but don't necessarily promote it. For instance, on my D850, 400 is less noisy than 320 and 250 and equally noisy with 200. On my Z6ii, 800 is less noisy than 640 and 500 and equally noisy with 400. So sometimes in darker situations, I just switch to my higher native ISO and work around that. Mark, if you were using a Z6ii (which makes no sense for you - it's just an example) you wouldn't set your ISO to 640 as you did in the video. You would set it to 800 and bump up your shutter speed to compensate and get a cleaner image. I believe some Fujis have dual native ISO sensors but I don't know which models.
@playeronthebeat
Жыл бұрын
This can also be a problem due to the way they implemented ISO. The thing is, sometimes it's implemented in a way that 50/100/200/400/800/1600/3200/6400 are the "standard" ISO formats whereas 640 is an ISO 400 pushed that far higher or an ISO 800 dialed back a bit. From a technical standpoint it's really frustrating. That's why I'm happy about ISO invariant sensors being a thing in many modern cameras.
@SilverLarry
Жыл бұрын
@@playeronthebeat Good point. The dual native ISO sensors on the 2 cameras I mentioned are otherwise ISO invariant as well.
@tuesdayjam5905
Жыл бұрын
On a D850, you shouldn't be experiencing any noise at 400 or below!!
@matthewwakeling4978
Жыл бұрын
It's very common for sensors to have two native ISO settings. For instance, the D7500 has native 100 and 400, and all the other ISO settings are basically derived from them. So, ISO100 is only just very slightly better than ISO400, and ISO320 is definitely worse than ISO400. When I do astrophotography, I use ISO400 with this camera, as that's definitely the best compromise between light sensitivity and maximum brightness detectable. I do get the impression that Nikon made the sensor as a ISO400 ISO-invariant sensor, but then added the ISO100-320 range on as a concession to when you have more light than ISO400 can cope with. Also, Tuesday Jam, yes there will still be noise - it's just it will be very small. There are types of photography such as HDR or astrophotography where this matters.
@s.andrewwaltersjr.1524
Жыл бұрын
Shooting "weather photography" (basically a huge overlap with landscape photography), I have moved away from my fear of I.S.O. to solve the same problem - shutter speed. In lower light conditions under clouds, to get those tack-sharp images of cloud structure, which are also constantly moving, requires fast shutter speeds that often result below proper exposure when trying to use ISO-100 Great video!
@MattTrevett
Жыл бұрын
With a7 III, my auto-ISO is set from 100-3200. Occasionally I'll set it to 6400 depending on the lens. I rarely use any additional noise removal than the standard Lightroom setting of 40. Honestly if you keep a fast enough shutter speed there isn't enough time for the sensor to pick up noise anyway. Slightly more than double the noise per second (assuming one stop adjustment), but half the exposure time equals roughly the same amount of noise. Fun to shoot in full manual and just set the aperture and shutter speed as desired whilst leaving the ISO setting to full auto.
@petemulhearn7787
Жыл бұрын
My fear of high ISO comes from my early days in photography in the 1960s when any film over 100 ISO would produce grainy grey shots. For colour transparencies I used 64 ISO film.
@Bernard-ux2eb
Жыл бұрын
Did you shoot Kodachrome?
@petemulhearn7787
Жыл бұрын
@@Bernard-ux2eb \some Kodachrome and some Agfa. Mostly did monochrome with FP3 or 4 100ASA but exposed at 400ASA and cooked with Promicrol or Microphen developer.
@potatofuryy
Жыл бұрын
My fear of high ISO comes from my D3300 that becomes overwhelmed by noise if you shoot over 400 ISO. (and it’s already pretty bad at 400)
@kencawley3121
Жыл бұрын
Eye-so for me. I've started using higher ISO levels for the reasons you covered. Unfortunately, my D7500 is a bit grainy above ISO 400. Invested in Topaz DeNoise AI which has helped tremendously.
@lawrencelunsford6028
Жыл бұрын
I'm back into photography after about a 15 year break and I'm amazed at how good high ISO images look compared to what I used back in the early 2000s. When I moved to all digital (from medium format film cameras) in the early 2000s I was using Nikon D1X, D100, and Fujifilm S3. I doubt I used any of them over ISO 400, MAYBE ISO 800. I now shoot with Nikon D700, 7100 and 7200. I can comfortably shoot them at 1600. Newer models may be better at higher ISOs than what I currently have, but I'm very happy with the results so far. Just subscribed. :)
@InteractiveDNA
Жыл бұрын
Good video! The problem with most photographers and videographers is that they don’t understand how cameras actually works with light. In digital camera ONLY have two things to exposure light (Aperture and Shutter Speed) The ISO is ONLY a Gain Controller. You can increase the ISO until your goal is reach before breaking apart. In Film Cameras we use the Triangle to proper exposure because ALL ( Aperture, Shutter Speed and ISO) will after the final photo or video, and that is why many miss information about today’s digital cameras comes into place. Think digital cameras as a microphone 🎤 that if you increase the gain (ISO) too much the frequency starts to be notice. In another words the ISO in digital cameras is a processing slider after the camera already took the picture.
@chrisfor
Жыл бұрын
Good stuff Mark. One of things that I look back at making a big difference in my images is when I figured out that selecting shutter speed was more important than ISO.
@manicdan481
Жыл бұрын
How I trained my mom for photography. Set Aperture as open as you can but still get your subject in focus, then set your shutter speed as slow as you can to get the motion you want. Then set your ISO to match the exposure, or leave on auto. ISO is rarely about a goal, its just the result of physics around the hardware or style of the image.
@Dustyphoto915
Жыл бұрын
This has been the easiest approach for me as a hobbyist. I bought an entry level full frame camera and let the camera brain worry about where ISO should land. I tell the story(aperture) and determine movement(shutter).
@tjsinva
Жыл бұрын
Good discussion. New cameras and processing software minimize most noise issues at even higher ISOs. 👍🥂
@metagore
Жыл бұрын
Great content Mark. One of the things I do for achieving a specific minimum Shutter Speed is to use Auto ISO and set the minimum Shutter Speed for Auto-ISO. I've added the Auto-ISO Minimum Shutter Speed to my Fn quick-menu in case I need to adjust it from my default setting of 1/125th (general hand-held setting). This allows me to select a minimum needed speed and then the auto-exposure settings will get me the lowest ISO setting possible in order to get that Shutter speed. Post-edit: I'm using Sony, so not sure if the Min-Shutter speed for Auto-ISO exists on other systems. (labeled ISO AUTO Min. SS in settings)
@ducnguyen1999
Жыл бұрын
Every system have that :))
@metagore
Жыл бұрын
@Duc Nguyen I would have guessed so, but ya' know... best not to assume what I'm not sure of.
@GirdHerd
Жыл бұрын
Mark, I follow about a dozen KZitem photographers. Now, because of your question, I will be listening to hear how each photographer says ISO.
@darrenkoobs6244
8 ай бұрын
My experience lines up with everything you’ve said here. If you have settings that bring in as much light as possible for the result you want, and still underexposed, high iso doesn’t create lots of noise at all. And like you said, today’s camera are so good they’ve mitigated the problem anyway. I recently upgraded to a full frame mirrorless from a dslr from 2008. I am getting drastically less noise at 3200 iso on the mirrorless than I did at 800 with the dslr. Love your content! Good explanations that have helped me tons!
@paulbirch7635
Жыл бұрын
Stick to ISO 100/200 is good advice from 15-20 years ago, but much has happened since then. I wholeheartedly agree with your take on eye-so. I remember my camera from 2003-2005-ish could not go past ai-zo 800 in normal operation (there was an I-soh boost function to stretch it to 3200), and by then it was a last resort to get anything that resembles a picture of your subject at all.
@ADPX24
Жыл бұрын
I have recently found that I love 640 for portraits and landscapes. I went out this past weekend to the gorge and if I wasn't doing a long exposure I was trying to shoot at 400-640iso all I could. There is something with the colors and softness of some images that I like from higher ISO. Even in post sliding the noise slider to the right softens images just a little. For action sports I do my best to stay at 100 as long as my shutter speed supports it. Great video, haven't heard anyone talk about ISO before.
@adipopa3966
Жыл бұрын
I started photography a bit over 2 years ago. I’m now studying photography at a film uni in my home country. I also was so afraid of higher ISO but now that I learned a little bit about how every setting of the camera works I keep may ISO at 320/400 when I want crispy, still images. I wish I had your video sooner, but hey…it’s never too late, right?
@TheHeraldOfChange
Жыл бұрын
Yes - The "Exposure Tetrad" ISO - Aperture - Shutter Speed - & Time of Day (White Balance/Temperature of Light) These are the FOUR things we can control in order to get a "desired" exposure. Light Temperature is the only non-camera specific setting that we can kinda control. If you really want to go deep, you could also consider Elevation and its impact on Atmospheric refractivity, or Pressure and its impact on Water Density in underwater photography, but these are really obscure, niche considerations.
@johnsaller2481
Жыл бұрын
I learned photography from my grandfather when I was ten years old. He gave me their brownie camera to use. He also showed me about the opening on back of his camera which used a stylus to write descriptions or info that stayed with the negative. I took a lot of pictures then but lost all the negatives but that was a good thing as was just learning would have been embarrassed back in my teens. He taught me shutter speed, lens aperture and depth of field, developing bw negatives and special film to take low light pictures. He died in 1968 and left me all his cameras. I made a enlarger out of the biggest one with large bellows. Took pictures at a nearby college. Making it myself was a great experience and learned a lot of what not to do. I.S.O. is what we called it and really didn't understand it until I started taking pictures in the fall. My memory of it was how much grain was in the negatives vs the ability to take a picture in low light or fast moving objects like men in a football game. I went into the Navy as a Electrician but kept my interest in Photography which came in handy taking periscope photos on my Submarine. They sent me to Periscope Photography school and that is where I learned about I.S.O and over developing film. I am retired now and have a digital Canon which is fun to play with but miss the clear pictures which the digital is getting closer to film! Thank you for your video and love to hear about the digital world!
@kevinroberts1888
Жыл бұрын
I do a lot of forests and brook pictures so I'll often put the iso for sharp trees too. I also like to shoot pictures of birds on the side and will usually use a faster iso to stop the action. I personally don't think a little noise ruins a picture as long as it doesn't distract from the overall picture. Back when I moved over from film to digital, I was so obsessed with getting no noise that I often ruined what would have otherwise been a great shot.
@emerana
Жыл бұрын
I chose the ISO 100 films too and should have bought a lot more ISO 400. So many underexposed or blurry failures. I don't miss the film era at all, but respect its foundations that got us to where we are now
@mrmrb04
Жыл бұрын
I’ve taken photos at 12800 many times. Sometimes if you don’t want motion blur it’s your only option. Honestly 12800 doesn’t look that bad! I always try and avoid it when I can but it’s ok to have noise in your photo imo
@DaveBerthiaume
Жыл бұрын
I think the best advice here is to run some tests with your own camera to determine the point at which increasing the ISO is too much for your personal taste. Then you don't have to spend time worrying about it in the field. Thanks, Mark! Oh, and I always say eye-so!
@taylormolitoris9131
Жыл бұрын
If your camera does get noisy quick or you need low iso for whatever reason you can always take a shot (on a tripod) at a lower iso and then another shot at a higher iso to freeze the movement. stack layers in photoshop with higher iso layer on top > create mask > invert to black > brush in the areas with leaves or movement from the higher iso shot with a white brush. If you're a purist and against blending then I understand this won't be an option. I do this often when shooting exteriors or landscape architecture where the client expects a low or native iso shot but also requests no motion blur. Just a thought.
@eugenefler3158
7 ай бұрын
Good job,Mark. Manual mode and ,I personally ,choose aperture by situation,than install shutter speed at minimum (your lens maximum focus x3) or higher if needed ,then ISO put to Auto mode and there you go….All noise is fixable later…😊
@Panphobia
Жыл бұрын
I definitely agree with most of what you're saying. However, I find it important to point out that your ISO-theory is greatly dependent on sensor size. On smaller sensors, higher ISOs cause the image to "fall apart" much quicker. Sure, modern full frame or medium format cameras easily allow for ISOs up to or beyond 6400 with out noticeably degraded image quality. On my 2015 micro four thirds camera, such high ISO values may be alright for online usage, not however for larger prints. And by the way, its definitely eye-soh ;)
@pedrocosta6440
Жыл бұрын
ISO was a significant question with film. The question of light sensibility is a completely different one today.
@leeny1871
Жыл бұрын
That waterfall shot is stunning 💙💙
@ko300zx
Жыл бұрын
I love on newer cameras you can use Auto ISO and set your max ISO to 3200 or 6400, or whatever you find is your maximum acceptable level. Then you can set everything else to exactly what you need and your camera will use the lowest ISO for the right exposure. In almost any situation where ISO 100 doesn't work, you can choose the best shutter/aperture for the situation while letting the camera do the ISO work. And since you chose the max ISO, you'll never get a photo you deem unacceptable.
@account-pending-deletion
Жыл бұрын
Exactly. Once you know what your max acceptable ISO is, you can set it in your camera and never have to think about it again.
@definingslawek4731
Жыл бұрын
@@account-pending-deletion You still have to think about it / control iso, just indirectly. Because often 0EV is too dark or too bright, but then you control iso with the exposure compensation dial instead of iso dial.
@DBqFetti
Жыл бұрын
Ok, watched 4 Minutes of it and I think I got the point. A brilliant feature for this is minimum shutter speed with auto-iso and the camera does it for you. I think all brands have something like it.
@eddiemcdowell1175
Жыл бұрын
Eye-S-Oh. Use aperture for depth of field. Then shutter speed for desired amount of motion blur and preventing camera shake. Lastly set ISO to get desired exposure. Enjoyed the video.
@leeny1871
Жыл бұрын
I say 'eye-soh' 😃 and I always was afraid of raising it at the beginning. But after a while I discovered that iso 100 always made my images too dark. Now, even in the middle of the day if I'm in a shady spot I will use around 250 - 400 and it doesn't affect the image quality at all but makes the images much brighter and the colours prettier. However it also depends on the camera too. I have a cheap canon DSLR which starts to produce image noise at iso 800. But with my newer and more expensive Fuji xt30 I can comfortably use iso 4000 -6000 without any issues. I only do that though if I'm not using a tripod at night, for example with street photography. Great video content!
@ericclancy5666
Жыл бұрын
Many thanks for this video very informative, I took up photography 2 years ago to get photos of the Birds in my garden , after watching loads of KZitem videos which were very informative but as you pointed out I got trapped by the "Eye-Soh" rule of keeping it low, a couple of months ago I started using higher Eye-Soh and was impressed with the change in the quality of my shots. It was good to come across your video as it confirmed what I was doing was ok, once again Many Thanks.
@OriginalWatchcow
Жыл бұрын
It takes awhile to get familiar enough with your gear to know what works and what doesn't. I tend to have and use older gear, so ISO tolerance is lower than the current generation of sensors. Less experienced photographers tend to lean on sound bite "rule of thumb" advice and are reluctant to stray from those rules.this is one of those areas where rules are as always going to be incomplete and experience is more valuable. In the very earliest days of digital cameras when converted film SLR bodies were the rule, one of my mentors that was into off-road crawling said something I'll always remember. "Selecting ISO is like choosing speed over an obstacle, slow as you can, fast as you need." that is still valuable today, and puts the burden of judgement not on some rule, but on the judgement of the photographer. Those old Kodak conversions mostly topped out at 400 in 1994 and were not great even at lower settings. But even with film, it was rare to use 400 on a paying job outside of the sports reporting fields. We live like kings now. We have cameras that can gift us with printable images at ISO well north of 1600 and there is no cost to experiment other than time and storage.
@sobo2
7 ай бұрын
9:48 very good illustration of what zooming means.
@TheMrDrMs
Жыл бұрын
I always thought of it, and explained it as, 'remember film? the back of the pack would show usage cases for the various isos, often iso 800 for action shots, that's because it allowed for a faster shutter speed for less motion blur' the concept still applies to digital iso.
@jonathonlong6504
8 ай бұрын
New to photography and it’s so bizarre that for the first few months all I’ve heard is the iso at 100 rule. Consider my mind blown. I shoot handheld most of the time and this explains why I don’t get quite tac -sharp images sometimes. Thanks for the info and great video.
@ghw7192
10 ай бұрын
Over four decades of shooting film, I load whatever film suits my subject and the conditions and normally set the ASA at whatever experience and tests have shown me works best.
@TeddyCavachon
Жыл бұрын
Digital sensors have a fixed dynamic range with exposure decisions usually based on exposing highlights with seen by eye detail. When the scene range measured in f/stops exceeds the sensor range measured in f/stops the shutter closes before enough pixels are absorbed by the shadow pixels to record detail in the shadows. The histogram indicates how much light as reached the sensor to record detail in all tonal valued from 255 specular refection white on the right to 0 black void on the left. Adjusting exposure until the right side of the histogram curve depicting the brightest values in the scene moves to just reach the right edge of the histogram the pixels in the highlights will be optimally exposed. Cameras also will black out and blink highlight areas with exceeded optimal exposure in the playback of DSLRs and live EVFs of mirrorless cameras. When scene range matches sensor range the left edge of the histogram will, like the highlight end, kiss the left side of the histogram. This can be easily seen if shooting a target consisting of a white and black towels and a 12% reflectance gray card. When the lighting that target is placed in matches the sensor range exactly and exposure is optimal the spike from the white towel will be just short of the right side, the one from the black towel just short of the left, and the one from the gray card in the middle. If using an 18% card its spike will be right of center. A simple empirical test of sensor range is to put a target like that with direct sun hitting it from the front at a 45° angle creating both highlights and shadows on folds of the white and black towels. First shoot the target bracketing ISO from 100 upwards, adjusting aperture and shutter as needed to maintain correct exposure with detail in the sunlit parts of the white towel (e.g. 1/3 stop under the highlight exposure warning blinkies). The “Sunny 16” rule is based on an aperture of f/16 at 1/ISO producing correct exposure so start the bracketing at ISO 100, f/16 and 1/100 sec. to see how your sensor conforms, then adjusting as necessary per the blinkies to get the highlights correctly exposed. Then repeat the same bracketed series with the sun hitting the back of the target creating rim lighting it. You will need the same “Sunny 16” exposure to keep the sunlit parts of the white towel exposed with detail but the front of it will be middle gray and the amount of detail recorded in the black towel will decrease. Both of those outdoor lighting scenarios will challenge and exceed the range of the sensors in many cameras as indicated by the position of the spike created by the black towel and the amount of detail recorded in the shaded areas illuminated by the skylight fill reaching them. The target will also make it easier to compare and evaluate the effect of ISO on noise in shadows and midtone values before and after any noise elimination adjustments. Repeat the test on an overcast day with less contrast and compare the results with the sunlit test shots and compare results \ What you will discover is that whenever the histogram exposed to the right for highlights does not also reach the left side in the shadows due to the contrast of the lighting conditions the camera will, at all ISO settings be amplifying only noise in deepest shadows. Higher ISOs shorten the dynamic range of the sensor resulting both a loss of shadow detail at capture and more apparent noise in those areas because there is no signal, only noise. The compromise between noise, desired DOF via aperture, and freezing action is a creative decision and testing with a target that challenges the sensor range will allow making more informed decisions when shooting.
@thierryhoornaert9950
Жыл бұрын
For me, it's I.S.O. I never had an issue when photographing a landscape. When photographing moving subjects inside, in the shadowy or darker spaces, ISO can leave noise in these (darker) photographs, especially with my older Canon crop-factor DSLR and kit lenses. I use Topaz Labs Denoise AI, which can do miracles, in these cases. Thanks Mark for the very interesting video.
@dangir1783
Жыл бұрын
I shooting always in manual aperture iso and times. I set a safety time and i use ISO to compensate exposure. For example during the day in reverse I set 1/125 aperture f5.6 to have sufficient depth of field and I use the ISO to increase and reduce the brightness of the scene. And evening falls, I impose f4 And 1/50 of the time and I increase the ISO so much I know that up to 1600 the camera has no problems if the EVF image is underexposed. Using a camera like Fujifilm's xt4 or xt5 this is much easier. I can manually set the dials even with the machine off and I can use the front and rear wheel of the machine in t mode for times and c for ISO to change any value While the aperture is changed manually on the lens since almost all Fujifilm lenses allow you to do it Although Fujifilm does not provide a natural color profile what I see on the viewfinder I like the same result using Classic Chrome that I see when I open the file on the PC
@michalbarski3386
Жыл бұрын
ISO keep it low, that is one of the first thing i herd when i started my photography (2 years ago ) i'm still scared of it but i'm slowly learning to get along with it. thanks for your great tutorial
@MegaDanielSK
Жыл бұрын
My 5D2 is very comfy at iso 640, and it gives me best performance at 160 (noise-wise). I learned to use 160, 320 and 640, because at those iso levels the amount of noise always dips lower than at the iso level before that. My 40D has a similar pattern but the 5D2 can really give the same noise amount at iso 640 as it would at iso 100. Super neat stuff.
@99unclebob
Жыл бұрын
Great video your ability to break it down into layman's terms is far better than allot of youtube photography channels, a big 👍 for you, i say it both ways, it just depends on who i am with when shooting or talking about the last field trip i was on, I am a hobbyist shooter and have used Sony since they bought Konica/Minolta back in the early 2000's and they've always been reliable and fairly robust, the ISO 100 heard people talk about never really bothered me, I just got to learn myself, who cares these are digital, you delete or photoshop them, now i have just gone full mirrorless in the last few months and have to learn all over again, got an A7 MK4, a hybrid camera, it has sure opened my eyes and its both intimidating and exciting at the same time and still love to learn even now in my 60's its all good, you have a new subscriber, all the new modern cameras i believe are good, it comes down to preference 👍
@franka6515
Жыл бұрын
It certainly sounds like me. Walking around in aperture mode and ISO100. Heavy use of tripod and lengthy shots setting things up. This year I have an a6600 and it's so good with handling noise that my plan for 2023 is Manual mode + Auto ISO and more hand-held shots for enjoyable outings. Cheers!
@TheWizdry
Жыл бұрын
I go way back to film days when grain really mattered. I was a news print photographer, and we used B&W tried and true Kodak TRI-X and T-MAX FILMS. The T-MAX film had such tight grain; I could PUSH the iso from 400 to 3200, and even 6400 if needed in extreme low light situations. Rarely used any film lower than 400iso. Now in the digital world with modern digital cameras; the iso settings look great all the way to iso 3200 and higher. The Nikon D3 can shoot at iso 6400 all night long with clean clear results, and newer cameras can shoot at ridiculously high iso with excellent results. Film grain is not always the enemy. So, generally; Portrait/studio photogs believe in the lowest iso rules. Field and event photogs believe in the medium to highest iso will get the shot. Shooting raw helps pull detail out of the dark areas.
@Angus_Macgregor
Жыл бұрын
As someone who started with film back in the 70s and was an early adopter of digital, I have seen much of the change in how ISO has become a true variable in image capture. I guess much of the reluctance to utilise it goes back to film and the early days of digital. With film, you were stuck with what you used (or set, if push processing) at the start of the roll. With early digital sensors, even moderate increase in ISO would cause awful noise issues. Nowadays, we have such good sensors and processing abilities that ISO (or sensitivity/amplification) has truly become a variable we can use as you describe.
@Ruscombephotos
Жыл бұрын
Thanks Mark! Personally, I spell out I.S.O. in pronunciation, ‘Eye-soh’ doesn’t sit comfortably with me to pronounce, but I am perfectly fine hearing others pronounce it ‘eye-soh’. I think this is a 17:54 British/American difference. I am British and I don’t think I’ve heard a British photographer not spell out the letters in pronouncing it. Maybe acronyms have to be more than three letters long to become pronounceable words. Like Opec or Unesco, or Fifa. I’m sure somebody will point out pronounceable three-letter acronyms, having written that. When I decide to bump up my ISO, if noise does become a problem, it is easily fixed in Topaz Labs DeNoise.
@YountFilm
Жыл бұрын
In the film/tv world, "iso" pronounced "eye-soh" is short for "isolated," which refers to certain situations such as multiple cameras being recorded through a switcher, but one or more of the cameras are also recording internally -- "isolated recording". So we generally pronounce i.s.o. as "i-s-o" to avoid confusion. And "disco" is short for "disconnect". So at the end of every shoot we have a disco party.
@p_kentertainment3338
Жыл бұрын
I started photography from AstroPhotography and thought it I wasn’t at 600 I wouldn’t have enough light for anything this helps so much
@rbweston
Жыл бұрын
As a young photographer I regularly used ASA:400 and ASA:1000 film stock, so was so used to slightly grainy images, when I switched to digital I was discouraged by the ISO:100 mentality.
@jameshuddle5111
Жыл бұрын
I agree, noise is not as big a problem as many have said. I recall my daughter correcting me when I would say ASA. She actually asked what that was. Then I explained how now it is called eye-so. Nowadays I use M more with auto eye-so.
@NullStaticVoid
Жыл бұрын
I used to really avoid going up the ISO dial. My first few cameras were APSC Canons like the T2i, which got noisy fast. Even when I upgraded to a full frame 6D, the noise was constant terror. Then I was at a concert with great dramatic lighting and I had my new at the time Fuji Xpro3. Ended up going as high as 5000 on some shots so that I could get a decent sharp photo without motion blur. (its kind of a weird thing I notice, they can have 3000 watts of light on the stage but it's all one color, and the camera is not getting a fair reading of available light so you have to go full manual and force it to use that light) When I was going over the photos the next day I could barely tell ISO 5000 from ISO 800. Sure if I zoomed in on details I would see more noise. But NOBODY looks at photos like that. It made me think about when I worked in sports broadcast. They had some blow ups of a few iconic football and baseball photos in the office hall way. Great photos from the 70s and 80s. And noisy as hell from film grain. But the composition and the emotion in the photos clobbers the noise.
@briansture4353
9 ай бұрын
I have read that international standards registered the word Iso. I use Topaz Denoise AI reducing noise to a minimum. I usually use it on the pic before adjusting in LR. Great with Jpegs. It helps LR to push detail in the shadows without looking overbaked. Especially when pics are taken with some of the latest cameras, saving so much space and processing time. Yes, I use RAW but not as often as I used to, only when I think it will enhance the pic. Astronomy pics scream out for RAW it is a must.
@wizofoz0605
Жыл бұрын
Hi Mark, Greetings from Down Under (or 'up over', as we like to think) Firstly, Thanks for a great channel. I've learned quite a bit from you over the years. As to the I.S.O. v's eyesoh debate, I think it comes down to when and where you were brought up. In most of the world,and for decades, we were used to the International Standards Organisation (ISO) film speed ratings, (Just as we are used to the decimal system,) whereas in the USA it was the ASA rating. So, we are used to using I.S.O. when describing film or sensor sensitivity to light. However, with the increased international reach of people such as yoursel, Mark, over time and with a predominance of educators (not all, but a predominance) coming out of the States, the use of the (in my opinion mispronounced) eyesoh has become prevalent. I use eaither term interchangeably, It's not the biggest problem in the photographic world, but it gets some folk hot under the collar. :) Keep up the good work
@damluar
Жыл бұрын
All of the cases you described are the "emergency" examples you mentioned at the beginning of the video. No photographer would just crank iso up for no reason.
@todd6068
10 ай бұрын
Boy, seeing your Fuji gear really brings back good memories. I HAD to leave Fuji because of poor auto focus. The Fuji is by far the most enjoyable cameras to shoot but my granddaughters comes first and there is absolutely no denying that any Fuji can autofocus and track the way my a7C did. And now the a7CII is just incredible. The tracking sticks like glue to an eyeball. You have to experience it in real life to be a believer. Still love those fujis though!
@NewsMoto
Жыл бұрын
Sports photographer here. I’m usually on shutter priority and ISO is in auto. In Sony you can set ISO limits where it will always choose the lowest possible at the desired shutter. Another is that in Sony, there is dual native ISO. It helps if you know your camera’s native second ISO. In my A7siii is 640 and 12800 at Slog2/3. My a7c is 500 and 3200 in slog 2/3
@dusty3913
Жыл бұрын
The purpose of increasing film speed is to enable one to create a photograph in low light. The results can vary. Any resultant noise is a byproduct of low-light. So, blaming the ISO number is akin to shooting the messenger.
@richardharvey1732
Жыл бұрын
Hi Mark, I tend to use the term eye-so because that is the acronym for the implies sensitivity range, it is loosely based on the old film emulsions which were made with differing combinations of chemicals to make them more or less sensitive to light, the same does not apply to digital camera sensors, each one is designed to perform at some specific sensitivity and this cannot be altered!. What the software does instead it vary the output amplification, this then also increases the amount of noise in the signal, this reduces the dynamic range, that is the difference between sensor saturation and the noise floor. The current range of Fujifilm cameras claim a dynamic range of up to fourteen stops, with a noise floor down there at around two or three of those stops, each time you increase the output gain by a factor of one you reduce that range by a bit more than one, thus a camera will a base ISO of one hundred to eight hundred the range of light and dark, across all colours will be significantly reduced, this means significant loss of detail and colour depth. Listening to you while typing this I hear that your main reason for doing this is the 'freeze' the action in moving subject and as you say there really is no other way you can do that unless you can find a lens with a much wider aperture to permit a faster shutter speed without compromising image quality, one other 'trick' to be wary of is the one where you increase shutter speed by reducing exposure time, this underexposed image with have less blur from subject movement but again the noise level is constant and once more you lose dynamic range Basically the claims you make for no loss of quality are false!, it could well be that the trade off is worth is from a subjective point of view, you can claim that the price is worth paying but nor-t that there is no price!. Cheers, Richard.
@Daeva83B
Жыл бұрын
ISO! hobbyist photographer here. I like to shoot in lower light environments (due to work and the available sunlight) Before my ISO would be all over the place. shooting by hand, but now i treated myself with a tripod and my first thought was.. to always shoot in ISO 100. I never liked the grain, if i want to add grain then i'll do that out of artistic reasons. Also i notice now that ISO 100 has a bigger dynamic range. Colors seem to pop more.
@petee19
Жыл бұрын
Great video Mark, I have only recently set my ISO to auto and a getting good results from photographing moving vehicles, trains, buses etc.
@Festvangelist
Жыл бұрын
For years I developed all my black and white negatives. I tried hard to keep my film ISO around 100 or 200 most often. When you got to 800 and above I really noticed a grainy image after enlargement. With all the technology in todays digital cameras I think a lot of the high ISO concerns for settings up to 1200-1600 today are almost mute. I love using my preset ISO brackets with auto ISO and concentrate on my shutter speed and aperture to achieve my compositional and creative goals.
@andrewhowson33
Жыл бұрын
Depends on sensor size also, bigger sensor is less forgiving with noise, whether there are lots of darker areas in your shots, whether it's really wide angle as higher iso creates noise in the edges there too. In my case, I avoid over iso 800 especially on interiors and don't worry too much in good light, which is often rare in the UK. Reason, I have to open up at 100% to check for noise, blur and dust particles before sending to picture library. There's no point finding "the shot" if the noise levels make it hard to sell. Thankfully, DXO Photolab's my software of choice and has saved me on many occasions. I also turn off auto noise reduction to have best quality when editing NEFs.
@arapahoetactical7749
Жыл бұрын
Great video! Being an old guy who started on film back in the 60s, I often forget that I can adjust ISO shot-to-shot. When shooting film, you're stuck with the ISO of the film you have loaded and the only way to change is to change the film in the camera or have multiple cameras. As I shoot both landscape and wildlife, it kind of sucked having 100 in the camera when I saw birds in flight or coyotes hunting and needing that higher ISO.
@matthewespenshade
Жыл бұрын
Since my background is mostly in cinematography, it surprises me that this 100 ISO thing is a thing among photographers. We shoot entire movies on 500t stocks, even in bright sunlight without color correction filters on a regular basis. The Sony A7s has a base ISO OF 800. It's optimal to shoot that camera at 800, not 100. 100 is basically negative gain on that camera.
@oldtowneast
Жыл бұрын
Wow your landscape photos are mind blowing
@alanp253
Жыл бұрын
Something to consider is the native ISO of your camera. For example, my Sony A7 IV has native ISO of 100 & 400. So, ISO 400 is less noisy than ISO 360. If 100 is not enough, I go to 400 and skip in between.
@cs3359
Жыл бұрын
Thank you so much this tip has improved my photography no end. As someone who's new to this i have followed the rules exactly to learn but that meant i would miss whole moments messing about with low light. Such a shame so truly thank you. Xx
@kennygo8300
Жыл бұрын
I want the shot. I want it the way I want. Full control over shutter and aperture... auto ISO... manual mode, all the time. I'll worry about noise in post. Also, eye-soh or I.S.O. --- it doesn't matter how you say it, just don't let worrying about it, make you miss the shot.
@ricoman7981
Жыл бұрын
I’m an eye-so guy but in the 1970’s, ‘80’s and if my memory serves me correct, the 1990’s, I was an A-S-A guy and mostly used Fujipro 50 and 100 asa and Kodachrome 64, all slide film. I always carried my cheap lightweight aluminum tripod so I could avoid the 400 asa at all costs because I was afraid of grain. I’m not sure why I worried about it so much, I was not professional and only shot for personal satisfaction, mostly landscape and travel pictures, shutter speed was secondary to aperture. That was long before the internet and easy access to so much info and I relied on professionals in the camera stores and a couple of photo magazine subscriptions.
@PhilipBallGarry
Жыл бұрын
"Eye-so" 🙏 🇯🇵 or "I.S.O"? Strangely I use them both - a bit like mixing metric and imperial. "100mm square bar - and I need two feet of it" 😂. Thanks Mark for helping us take a fresh look at ISO and it's use in balancing an exposure to get exactly the shot you need. Auto ISO algorithms on many cameras are a bit lazy and tend to go a bit wild a bit too easily. I know we can limit the range by programming certain variables into the selection but it still warrants taking control of this point of the triangle ourselves. Chroma noise is the main issue in low light so it's important to try and avoid that. The gift is knowing when to push things a little. Thanks for the insight. I have an X-T2 and an X-E1. If I swap from the E1 straight to the T2 can you believe I'm initially hunting for the ISO control in a menu? "Oh there it is - that humongous dial right there!". That's my poor aging brain 😂
@polarized8708
Жыл бұрын
I like the Fuji for giving us three AutoISO settings, which can switched within a second and paired with min. shutter speed. I like to have something between ISO1XX-ISO500, ISO1XX-3200 and ISO1XX-6400. You can denoise everything with todays software and if this couldnt fix it, maybe software improve in 5 years.
@eyesonly4451
Жыл бұрын
ISO is much bigger than just photography. We see it a lot in defining standards for many industries. I think that people mostly use the "I-so" form when referring to a specific standard like "I-so nine-oh-oh-one" for the ISO 9001 quality control standards, while using the "I-S-O" version when referring to the organization itself. That said, the "I-S-O" version is always correct in more formal reference, whereas the "I-so" version is an informal usage amongst practitioners of said standards.
@TheFamedwarrior72
Жыл бұрын
I very much appreciate this video. I’m new to dslr photography and I just started playing with ISO to get low light photos. I’m going to play around with the ISO tomorrow on a photo field trip. Thank you
@hitchreel69
Жыл бұрын
You the Goat @3:17 bro!! The edit there was flawless 📽💯💥
@smamind
Жыл бұрын
I am glad I ran into this video. I am a noob and I leaving that ISO at 100 and trying to see how I can get sharp pictures. It was not working because I am opening up the aperture. Thank you and thank you!
@Gravelbomber
Жыл бұрын
I learned recently, that iso 100 does NOT mean noise free. I took some photos of an old building with my new R5, and thought there was something wrong with it, because I could see noise in the sky and windows of the building. I then did an experiment where I took identical photos with the R5 and R6, same settings, same lens. Then I blew up both images the same size and compared. Both were the same in windows, sky, and shadows. The R5 just had a little more detail.
@shanwen88
Жыл бұрын
I was surprised even till today people don't use Auto ISO. It was a godsend when I bought my fuji camera 10 years ago. Just focus on the shooting and composition!
@outofthecommonphotography5503
Жыл бұрын
This was very helpful. A perspective I never thought about. I'm usually set at 400ISO. But, I have had scenarios that knowing this would've really helped. I was so into making sure I had enough light and the world was still that I never thought, let me bump up the ISO for fear of noise. But, I get it. There's a balance. Still knowing that simple perspective I know would've helped with some pictures I was trying to take of flowers with a slight breeze. I would wait until it was completely still. Now, that's not to suggest bumping up the ISO being so close would guarantee a sharp photo. But, I believe it definitely would've helped!!!
@Virindi77
Жыл бұрын
Exploiting ISO invariance, I stick to ISO64 on my Nikon bodies. Then adjust exposure in post. Unless it's low light then ISO800 gives better results with the high conversion gain on these sensors. You may also stack handheld exposures to reduce noise... I do that a lot now and basically all my photos are absolutely noise free even when in high contrast situation the shadows are cleaner than ever.
@tscott6843
Жыл бұрын
I.S.O. I shot film for over twenty years and don't remember anyone saying "eye so" until well into the digital imaging era. ISO was a function of the film. You basically used ISO 100, 200, 400, 1000 or 2000 film rolls, commonly with 32 exposures per roll. Film got more expensive as the ISO increased. Once you loaded the film, you were stuck with that ISO. It couldn't be set in camera and couldn't be changed until the roll was done (or you lost remaining exposures if pulled early). That's why there is a square on the back of film cameras, where you slid the end flap from the film box so you knew your current ISO.
@CBressanPhoto
Жыл бұрын
I would probably add the fact that higher ISOs add that soft noise that makes a picture more attractive.
@agustinrecio
Жыл бұрын
This is the video that nobody asked for but everyone needed, thank you 🙏🏻
@GifyTheOld
Жыл бұрын
My approach is to use the lowest ISO possible appropriately for the specific situation, to get the photo I want.
@erikswenson2659
Жыл бұрын
Before making any decisions about ISO, you should determine if your camera's sensor is ISO invariant and what the native ISO is. Assuming you have an ISO invariant camera, then it is probably best to use the native ISO if you shoot in raw. This is more to maximize dynamic range - a benefit if the scene has deep shadows and bright highlights and if you misgauge the exposure.
@BigJim1961
Жыл бұрын
As you recommended at 6:05 I took a number of shots of my Historic Route 66 coffee cup, testing the ISO on my Nikon D5100. I took the ISO all the way up to it's maximum setting Hi 2. I used a tripod, setting my apreture at f2.8, and my shutter speed at 1/100th of a second to 1/500th of a second. Even at Hi 2 my pictures were clear. I did have some noise in the image but that only showed up when I zoomed in to my maximum zoom. But even then the pictures were very usable. I have watched a couple of youtube videos that told me that I should never take the ISO of my D5100 higher than 1600 to 3200 or I will have unusable images. But even at Hi 2 the pictures were great.
@BigJim1961
Жыл бұрын
And to answer your question I say Eye Soh part of the time and Eye S Oh part of the time.
@ConnectTheDeshes
Жыл бұрын
He is absolutely right however it also depends on the quality of the lens aswell. Some lens above certain ISO dont bring great results
@DaveK385
Жыл бұрын
"According to the International Organization for Standardization, the abbreviation for their name is ISO. On their website, they go on to explain that you should pronounce the abbreviation as a word: eye-soh and that the abbreviation and its pronunciation are based on the Greek root word for equal: isos."
Пікірлер: 2 М.