Do you always shoot at ISO 100?

[someoldguy]

The point of the post is to find out what you sacrifice next if you can't shoot at ISO 100.

Thank you for saying it's dumb. I'm open for suggestions.

If you're shooting at iso 200-400 ,on a relatively new DSLR , not much . Past that , there's a point where you'll start picking up noise , or what appears to be coarseness in the image . Noise is the trade-off for getting an acceptable exposure in lower light situations . At what iso value noise begins to appear is pretty much a function of your cameras engineering and how much you are willing to tolerate in your image of course depends on your vision of how the image should look .
For your entertainment , here's 3 images , The first shot at ISO 400 , the second at 2000 , the third at 12800 .

 

[snberk103]

....

BTW 1/60th is slow as hell for my shaky hands....I like to be at 1/100th minimum if I can....ever try shooting 1/60th on a 135mm non-IS lens? Yeah...

Actually, that is easy if you know how. That's only 1 stop below the overly generalized rule of thumb. I've known photographers who routinely go 3 or 4 stops below the rule, and get acceptably sharp images.

If you know what you are doing, you can get good shots at a sports event with very slow shutter speeds. But you actually have to have some experience.

-------

To answer the OP's question....

First I pull my tripod out, if it's available. For the shots I like to take, a tripod is almost always going to make an improvement, and then I can drop the shutter speeds. I like to print big, so any camera shake may be evident.

My camera has a quite limited ISO range - 50 to 800, though it has a really wide dynamic range, so I can underexpose most scenes and then recover in post if I need to.

If I still can't make the shot, I put the camera away and enjoy the scene. There will be something else to photograph tomorrow, or the next day, or next week.

Generally, I shoot at 100 - but I've been reminded in this thread that I need to figure out which ISOs on my camera are 'non-native'. Never got around to it, and I have the perfect studio setup currently in place to test this....

 

[Prodo123]

IS doesn't stop subject motion.
Your point is wrong.

Lots of experts here. Not much expertise.

You only discussed camera shake.

 

[Edge100]

I leave my ISO around 320 - 640 normally, because I want to be prepared to get any shoot regardless of lighting conditions. The extra "IQ" of the files from the 100ISO is not worth potentially missing a shot because I had to shoot at 1/25th and its a blurry mess.

This.

Lowest ISO that gives you the shutter speed you need. EoS.

 

[talmy]

The entire topic is too general. Might as well ask "do you always shoot at f/8?"

Here's an ISO 100 shot on a D200 (base ISO is 100) taken before dawn with a 30 second exposure. No, it was not handheld. Click on the image to see full size.

The second picture shows the effect of excessive film grain. You can see things were much worse in the days of film, even though the digital image was taken with a D200 at ISO 3200.

 

[cocky jeremy]

I try to shoot as low as possible. Usually ISO 200. But with with 5D Mark II and Lightroom 4, i can shoot as high as ISO 6400 and it's still extremely clear.

 

[nateo200]

Actually, that is easy if you know how. That's only 1 stop below the overly generalized rule of thumb. I've known photographers who routinely go 3 or 4 stops below the rule, and get acceptably sharp images.

If you know what you are doing, you can get good shots at a sports event with very slow shutter speeds. But you actually have to have some experience.

But why compromise when you have other choices? I'm not trying to ruffle peoples feathers here but theses rules seam constraining...I know photographers who don't mind getting really dirty at high ISO's and crazy shutter speeds and then obviously guys who are the opposite...My hands shake more than they used too...I've got nerve damage + arthritis in my camera hand....believe me 1/60th is not going to look pretty unless I'm following my subject at speed on a tripod with IS lenses! I like stay between 1/100th and 1/200th...I ride the exposure as low as I can, i.e.: 1.8 or even 1.2 depending on my glass and get my positioning/angle just right since at a low f/stop the DoF can get in the way. When I first started out I would just lazy out and go with 1/500th or whatever which is pretty excessive but now I like 1/160th...then again most of my experience is video related so I'm used to motion at 24fps using a 1/48th shutter....but thats for drama stuff...if I do sports video (which I hate) then I usually mix 1080p30 and 720p60 with 120 and higher shutter speeds depending on available light! Just my preference....

The entire topic is too general. Might as well ask "do you always shoot at f/8?"

Here's an ISO 100 shot on a D200 (base ISO is 100) taken before dawn with a 30 second exposure. No, it was not handheld. Click on the image to see full size.

The second picture shows the effect of excessive film grain. You can see things were much worse in the days of film, even though the digital image was taken with a D200 at ISO 3200.

Well said...and great shots....I love the bridge one..looks like either a 35mm or 28mm focal length did I guess right? I do this all the time for fun hehe.

I try to shoot as low as possible. Usually ISO 200. But with with 5D Mark II and Lightroom 4, i can shoot as high as ISO 6400 and it's still extremely clear.

Ah the beauty of a nicer sensor...this is where price really shines with those high ISO's....I loved using the 5D Mk.II because of that...hoping to grab a used one on the cheap

 

[snberk103]

But why compromise when you have other choices? I'm not trying to ruffle peoples feathers here but theses rules seam constraining...

Far enough. These threads are good because we often get to share some knowledge around.... I don't see the rules as 'constraining' - because they aren't really rules. I see them as easily remembered 'guides' to better shooting, based on experience.

I know photographers who don't mind getting really dirty at high ISO's and crazy shutter speeds and then obviously guys who are the opposite...My hands shake more than they used too...I've got nerve damage + arthritis in my camera hand....believe me 1/60th is not going to look pretty unless I'm following my subject at speed on a tripod with IS lenses!

That fits in with my belief that every photographer needs to find their personal 'shake' quotient. One of the big tips I got from a pro who had been in the field for decades was how to hold my camera, when needing to drop the shutter speed.

You adjust the strap length ahead of time, and then leave it. Then, when you need to, you wind the strap around your wrist and forearm about 1 or 2 or 3 times with the strap going behind your elbow. When you pull the elbow back against your body the strap tautens from your elbow (round the arm) to the wrist and camera. It pulls the camera tight into your wrist - you barely have to hold it. When you rest your elbow on your body you have a surprisingly rigid camera support system. Easier to do than to describe - but he learned it from a competition (rifle) sharpshooter. Find some Youtube footage of some sharpshooters and see what I mean.

 

[Edge100]

You adjust the strap length ahead of time, and then leave it. Then, when you need to, you wind the strap around your wrist and forearm about 1 or 2 or 3 times with the strap going behind your elbow. When you pull the elbow back against your body the strap tautens from your elbow (round the arm) to the wrist and camera. It pulls the camera tight into your wrist - you barely have to hold it. When you rest your elbow on your body you have a surprisingly rigid camera support system. Easier to do than to describe - but he learned it from a competition (rifle) sharpshooter. Find some Youtube footage of some sharpshooters and see what I mean.

http://yanikphotoschool.com/tips/the-1-monopod/

 

[snberk103]

http://yanikphotoschool.com/tips/the-1-monopod/

I'd forgotten about that trick..... thanks! Sometimes I think we get so caught up in the digitally technical side, that we forget about the simple physics.

 

[talmy]

Well said...and great shots....I love the bridge one..looks like either a 35mm or 28mm focal length did I guess right? I do this all the time for fun hehe.

Bingo! Nikkor 35mm f/2 prime lens. Set at f/8. 30 second exposure was whatever it would take to get correct exposure. Long exposure NR turned on.

 

[righteye]

Yes, I always shoot at ISO 100 even when it´s dark...

How can you ask such a stupid question?

A rather harsh and unnecessary response.

Could you not think of anything constructive to say rather than be derogatory.

Anyway iso 100 is my favourite iso as 99% of my work is Landscape and Macro

photography executed on a tripod.

 

[snberk103]

Yes, I always shoot at ISO 100 even when it´s dark...

How can you ask such a stupid question?

Because they are new to the field and trying to learn something? Because we all don't just pop out of the womb being an expert in everything? Because they were looking for an explanation from what is (normally) a generous and supportive community?

 

[Mito]

Because they are new to the field and trying to learn something? Because we all don't just pop out of the womb being an expert in everything? Because they were looking for an explanation from what is (normally) a generous and supportive community?

Sorry for that but these things are basics. You can find such things in every site about photography and even more information about aperture, shutter,...
For me it looks like someone is lazy and he´s expecting from us to tell him a answer. I really like to help people which are interested... when I was getting into a photography I read book about it, about basics and so I learned. For things which weren´t in the book I used internet (google).

It depends. If I need faster shutter speed to froze action I´m using higher ISO, for example in street photography I´m using 400-1200 (depends on light and photograph). For landscape I´m using ISO 100 with tripod (I´m able to use longer shutter speeds). Hope this helped.

 

[snberk103]

Sorry for that but these things are basics. You can find such things in every site about photography and even more information about aperture, shutter,...
For me it looks like someone is lazy and he´s expecting from us to tell him a answer.

Of course, your other option was not to answer at all.... easier too.

I really like to help people which are interested...

Yep, me too...

 

[nburwell]

I primarily shoot with my camera body attached to a tripod, so I mainly stick to 100-200 ISO. I like to retain as much detail as possible when I print my images out, so I'm a big fan of long exposures at low ISO setting.

 

[blanka]

I mostly shoot at Auto Iso with a preference for 200, and a max of 6400 (my camera has no 100). When using flash, I turn up the preference to the light condition, 1600-3200 often, in a way the available light is used to the max. Up to 1600 I don't see any difference in noise levels, only the D-range drops a little.

 

[sim667]

I really dont get the OP's question, surely the ISO is relative to the lighting conditions, the aperture you want to use in order to create the depth of field you want, or the shutter speed you want to use in order to capture your image.

If its too dark to shoot on 100 ISO does the OP just not bother taking the photo then?

Generally 100-200 for studio, 400 ish for daylight (unless its a grey day, i found that in china because of the smog blocking out good sunlight I had to use 640 a lot), and 800-1000+ for night time (and quite a lot of festival/gig work)

I tend to find that my D200 holds itself well in the 800-1000 range, which should be a bit on the noisier side as its a reasonably out of date camera now


Pretty lights - glade stage by simbojono, on Flickr


But it also copes well with real mixed lighting conditions on the higher ISO's, iirc these would have been about 800, as the lights were contiuously changing.


meteor by simbojono, on Flickr

 

[JustForSneaks07]

I only shoot low ISO for headshots and anything that doesn't require that much movement, hence the name slow speed in film photography.

 

[NZed]

Not really. After getting my 7D, ISO 3200(or even 4000 in some situations) has about the same noise level as my old XSi on 1600.

But landscapes and portraits in daylights? Its definitely below 400(or 1000).

 

[mustang_dvs]

The best ISO is whatever will get the job done best.

I have no qualms about using the full, extended range of my 1D Mark III. Generally, under studio lights, 50 is where it's at, but I'll go all the way to 6400, if that's what it takes to get the shot.

People get waaaay too caught up in pixel peeping, these days.

I just worked with an amazing Magnum photographer who was photographing British Marines using only moonlight, in the mountains outside of Kandahar. Trust me, he wasn't sweating the "best" ISO, or whether the focus was perfect.

Personally, I miss Kodak TechPan -- which could be shot at ASA25 and produce incredibly fine-grained, continuous tone images, or pushed to ASA3200 and processed fast and hot and produce stark, über-contrasty black and white images with zero gray tones.

 

[Edge100]

The best ISO is whatever will get the job done best.

I have no qualms about using the full, extended range of my 1D Mark III. Generally, under studio lights, 50 is where it's at, but I'll go all the way to 6400, if that's what it takes to get the shot.

Interesting that you're using ISO 50 in the studio. Any reason you'd want to give up that stop of DR over ISO 100 (assuming you're using the 1D3)?

People get waaaay too caught up in pixel peeping, these days.

I just worked with an amazing Magnum photographer who was photographing British Marines using only moonlight, in the mountains outside of Kandahar. Trust me, he wasn't sweating the "best" ISO, or whether the focus was perfect.

Yep. Use whatever ISO it takes to get the shot.

Personally, I miss Kodak TechPan -- which could be shot at ASA25 and produce incredibly fine-grained, continuous tone images, or pushed to ASA3200 and processed fast and hot and produce stark, über-contrasty black and white images with zero gray tones.

Ilford PanF?

 

[lizardofwoz]

Back in the good old days of real photography - with FILM - 35mm was only used for quick coverage situations. Anything that required higher quality or larger print sizes than 10x8 moved up to medium or large format cameras.

Colour negative films became faster and less grainy so that 400 ASA Fuji or B&W Tri-X in a diluted developer became standards.

Many pros could hand-hold cameras down to a 15th and just about everyone could comfortably handle a 30th (except hardened photo-journalists with hangovers and blurred vision).

In medium format, cameras like the RB67s had so much inert mass that they too could be hand-held at lower speeds, even allowing for the large reflex mirror.

I agree with an earlier poster. There is no 'correct' setting. Use whatever yields the best results for you and count yourselves lucky to not be spending hours in dim light printing negatives and sniffing hypo.

 

[arogge]

My favorite is 68030.

The base ISO Speed depends on the hardware, and can be 50, 80, 100, 200, or something in between.

 

[100Teraflops]

The best ISO is whatever will get the job done best.

I have no qualms about using the full, extended range of my 1D Mark III. Generally, under studio lights, 50 is where it's at, but I'll go all the way to 6400, if that's what it takes to get the shot. ...

I agree! I used to be iso shy, and then I experimented with high iso photos. A 35mm sensored camera helps by providing cleaner photos too! Now I'm happily located in the happy medium.