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

• Canon EOS R
• RF24-105mm F4 L IS USM
• 24.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/25 sec
• ISO 40000

 

[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