ISO should I be changing habits

[Photofarmer]

As you guys know my preferred genre is lightning/storms.

Basically shutter 5 to 30 seconds varies. Aperture F5.6 to 8 sometimes 11 during day.

But I never ever change ISO always 100 .

Is my photography lacking because I don’t go higher?

All manual of course due to nature of subject.

Would I be better at 400 800?? And modern editing programmes can fix it later?

Guess nutshell will higher iso improve this 100.

 

[Only RF]

I think you are limiting some things at nir moving past 100 and yes it can be fixed. ISO 40,000

 

[PKM-UK]

Hi Peter,

Have a watch of this YouTube video by Simon d'Entremont and see if it helps.

Phil

 

[Photofarmer]

Guess I’ve always been told “native” iso no higher never stuffed with it any of you guys find some high iso lightning shots on internet anywhere and I will look and learn no such thing as exposure simulation with lightning cant stuff around you might miss a bolt

 

[PKM-UK]

Guess I’ve always been told “native” iso no higher never stuffed with it any of you guys find some high iso lightning shots on internet anywhere and I will look and learn no such thing as exposure simulation with lightning cant stuff around you might miss a bolt

Hi Peter,

The only person I know who shoots lightning is you.

Two examples of people who also enjoy this challenge (both using ISO at and over 100) can be found via these links - Nick Page, Ben Harvey.

Make of their techniques and advice what you will...

Phil

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

(rhetorical question) I almost never shoot in native ISO. Should I be changing my habits?!

I think it's important to know how manipulating all 3 factors in the exposure triangle impact a photograph, and to practice changing them so that you know what is required when it's time to take a photograph. To me the question isn't so much should you be changing as it is, are you getting the shots you want the way you want them without changing your ISO setting?

I can certainly think of situations where the shutter speeds you mention would be far too long and lead to movement within the frame (like the branches in your shot moving in the wind), and if you're tossing shots that you would have otherwise kept because of that then you've answered your own question. But I'm guessing you're shooting without a lightning trigger, so long exposures are necessary and movement (almost) irrelevant since native ISO allows the lightning to act as a global flash with the rest of the exposure time having little to no effect - so perhaps not?

Knowing how and when to use the range of settings is what's important. Not ever using one should be a situational choice. If it's not then you should probably be experimenting so you understand, perhaps, why you're not changing it.

 

[Terrible Terrestial]

The photo you showed suffers from problems other than ISO, and to answer your question: no, higher ISO would not improve it.

For this specific picture, you would have to increase the dynamic range (e.g. by exposing for the tree separately, or using flash to add detail in shadows); change the saturation and luminosity of the sky; last but not least shoot in raw, and only then export to JPEG compressing for quality -- the unpleasant purple artefacts you see are from imperfect JPEG compression, and are not related to ISO.

Shooting flashes of lightning is not trivial. You have extreme lights and shadows, and need to deal with them somehow. Multiple exposures (for the lightning itself, most likely using ND filters, and for shadows separately), and then stacking them into one picture, is probably your way to improve photo quality.

 

[TenaCJed]

What is it that you think you need improved upon, that would help answer more specifically? What post modifications have you made as well, as that can significantly impact the end result of the photo if severe modifications have been made.

I think @Jake Shoots Birds gives solid advice on understanding what changing your ISO does for your shooting situation, along with Aperture and what you want you shutter speed to be. Higher ISO means slower shutter speed if Aperture is not changed, if that is what you want then yes it can be helpful. If you do want a higher number Aperture, but do not want the slower shutter speed that change causes, then yes higher ISO will help.

I would not be concerned with a higher ISO over 100, yes it adds some noise; however that can be rectified with several software options available depending on how high of an ISO you choose.

 

[miuzi]

Hi Peter,

Have a watch of this YouTube video by Simon d'Entremont and see if it helps.

Phil

Good advice, Simon d'Entremont makes solid videos and is a great communicator for any level of photographer.

I've never been one to stick to native ISO, but in the past, I'd try to keep it lower where possible. What I often ended up having to do though was correct for underexposure when processing my images, which would make them look as bad if not worse than if I'd just used a higher ISO. Newer cameras now just blow my mind with their high ISO performance though. The combination of my R8 and my $200 50mm f1.8 basically lets me take photos at night, handheld. No IBIS, and not a stabilized lens, but images at ISO 10000 or even like 40000 still look remarkably good, whereas with my previous camera, anything over 3200 was nearly unusable. And then as mentioned by others, the increasingly sophisticated noise reduction built into processing software further enhances the possibilities of image quality at high ISOs. Don't be afraid to compromise on it if it helps you get the photos you're looking for.

 

[Photofarmer]

thanks all i do shoot in raw had a go at post editing in above and below still learning that raindrops yeah

 

[Photofarmer]

 

[Photofarmer]

Thanks for advice by the way. Maybe I should reword it can you use Auto Iso I doubt it. Prepare for a lot of sheep photos

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

Thanks for advice by the way. Maybe I should reword it can you use Auto Iso I doubt it. Prepare for a lot of sheep photos

If you can't then 95% of my photos don't exist.

Auto ISO has its place. I shoot wildlife (primarily birds) in Manual mode almost exclusively. I set shutter speed and aperture to get the desired result and let the camera figure out ISO. I can cap that value where I feel I need to for image quality (I do 12800 on the R5 & R6, 6400 on the R7), and if it needs more than that I get an underexposed image and deal with it. Wildlife in action in sun and shadows can vary too quickly for me to deal with full manual, and allowing the camera to set either aperture or shutter speed for me is too risky.

As I mentioned before, you want to know how changing it as a part of exposure impacts your work, and with ISO that means with dealing with noise (for which there are some amazing tools now). Allowing the camera to choose it can take a lot of the weight off of shooting in manual mode.

 

[miuzi]

If you can't then 95% of my photos don't exist.

Auto ISO has its place. I shoot wildlife (primarily birds) in Manual mode almost exclusively. I set shutter speed and aperture to get the desired result and let the camera figure out ISO. I can cap that value where I feel I need to for image quality (I do 12800 on the R5 & R6, 6400 on the R7), and if it needs more than that I get an underexposed image and deal with it. Wildlife in action in sun and shadows can vary too quickly for me to deal with full manual, and allowing the camera to set either aperture or shutter speed for me is too risky.

As I mentioned before, you want to know how changing it as a part of exposure impacts your work, and with ISO that means with dealing with noise (for which there are some amazing tools now). Allowing the camera to choose it can take a lot of the weight off of shooting in manual mode.

This exactly. With the performance at previously unthinkable ISOs that modern cameras now achieve, this is increasingly how I'm shooting. Set the aperture and shutter speed for the desired result, and then let the camera deal with ISO. It's really freeing!

 

[Photofarmer]

If you can't then 95% of my photos don't exist.

Auto ISO has its place. I shoot wildlife (primarily birds) in Manual mode almost exclusively. I set shutter speed and aperture to get the desired result and let the camera figure out ISO. I can cap that value where I feel I need to for image quality (I do 12800 on the R5 & R6, 6400 on the R7), and if it needs more than that I get an underexposed image and deal with it. Wildlife in action in sun and shadows can vary too quickly for me to deal with full manual, and allowing the camera to set either aperture or shutter speed for me is too risky.

As I mentioned before, you want to know how changing it as a part of exposure impacts your work, and with ISO that means with dealing with noise (for which there are some amazing tools now). Allowing the camera to choose it can take a lot of the weight off of shooting in manual mode.

with varied bolts of lightning in strenght intensity and duration auto ISO would handle it?

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

For whatever it’s worth, I am a photographer that spent exactly 5 minutes (not literally) using DSLR cameras that were 10+ years old when I started (Pentax K50 and Canon T3). The T3 is actually quite good all the way to 6400, but there is still a good deal of noise. The K50 isn’t bad either, but the noise to difficult to process out past 6400, even though the camera’s ISO reaches 51,200.

At the 6 minute mark I bought an R6 Mark 2 and as everyone knows the mirrorless cameras handle higher ISO and the files clean up so much better than anything before. I think the “keep the ISO low” mantra is outdated and from an era of sensors, processors, and software that just weren’t as capable as the stuff we have today. I’ve delivered pictures shot at ISO 12,800 from my R6 Mark 2 with zero issues. I am switching to continuous LED light for headshots/portraits and I might have to bump my ISO from 100- 640, and no one will know or care.

 

[Photofarmer]

Ok next severe lightning storm will have one camera on Auto Iso for a while and other set up as normal. Guess I’m specifically talking lightning.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

I would limit your auto ISO range. I’ve noticed my R6 Mk2 really likes to push ISO really high. I set mine to max out at 12,800 on auto.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

with varied bolts of lightning in strenght intensity and duration auto ISO would handle it?

You have a very specific need and I believe auto-anything might be problematic since the metering is based on what's in the frame at the moment the shutter is engaged. Maybe that might differ with a trigger, but otherwise what you're doing is completely manual. A camera can't meter and adjust for something that's not there yet (unless you try and fake it out with Exposure Compensation - but that's just getting manual with automatic and who needs that?!).

 

[David Stallard]

My answer - try it! what have you got to lose? pad and pencil (or notes in phone ;-) ) make a note of when /what you changed - think you will be pleasantly surprised at how well it will do.

 

[miuzi]

My answer - try it! what have you got to lose? pad and pencil (or notes in phone ;-) ) make a note of when /what you changed - think you will be pleasantly surprised at how well it will do.

Definitely, just trying new techniques and experimenting is always worthwhile. I feel it's called an artistic "practice" for a reason!

 

[tpatana]

I think you are limiting some things at nir moving past 100 and yes it can be fixed. ISO 40,000

View attachment 20765

Slightly off-topic...

One of my hobby (with few buddies) is to identify locations from pictures. Especially one person is amazing on those, she can find the craziest clues on pictures to pinpoint the location. So quite often when I see picture of something, I try to find the spot and if I can't I toss it to the buddies and often one of them finds it.

This time I have to say me/we failed. What makes it more strange, this has so many clues. I tried to read most of the texts too to help searching. The red is something like beautiful thick patience, also the first two characters are name of a city in south Taiwan (Meinong (there's only few shrines in that city, wasn't any of them)). The front pillars say giving light on top and I think it's red plum on the bottom. The pillars on the back are some other light, didn't inspect what light as probably wouldn't help. In general quite typical setting for shinto shrine or similar. I think the tree in middle is Momiji which is common in Japan, also just purely from the architecture I was guessing Kyoto-Nara -regions although Taiwan often throws wrench as lot of their buildings were done during the Japanese occupation so they resemble Japanese style really closely. There's no natural light so can't guess the road orientation (which help surprisingly often on tough pictures. The trees are bit more leafy towards back-left on the picture so that could be south, then making the road SE-to-NW direction, house being on the SW-side of the road). The crest on doors is too small, can't make the details. Although there's some signs on the red post that might be the crests, one looks like mitsudomoe, the other looks like pentagon but can't find crest like that. The smaller text on the lantern is bit too small to read, might be Obu/Yotomi name.

Scrolled through lot of temples trying to find this place but no luck. The texts also didn't give anything, with or without any added guessed clues like shrine / 神社 and such.

So please tell me where you took this picture so I can sleep

 

[Only RF]

I came across a video that may interest you.

LOW LIGHT AND HIGH ISO PHOTOGRAPHY: Do what the best low light photographers do!

Want to take amazing wildlife photos? Check out my new course with 20 modules and over 5 hours of content, no fluff! AND A CHANCE TO WIN A $13,000 600mm f4 ...

www.youtube.com