Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: What's your take on cranking up ISO?

  1. #1

    Default What's your take on cranking up ISO?

    Sorry to ask, but I'm a fairly new user here. Used to shoot in film & got a D80 sometime back but I haven't found much time to seriously practise yet.

    I did some car pics (internal & external) & they turned up great on a borrowed Nikon 17-55 2.8. Then bought an 18-200VR for an all round travel lens but it just doesn't give me the results.

    I see that many landscapes & great pictures were taken with ISO 100 or lesser. Is the tone, sharpness or colour loss on ISO above 400 or 800 that significant? (Can PS later?) Other than the noise issue (I rarely print anything above 8R so it's never an issue) why is it that people scream foul on pushing ISOs high up, especially when we're limited on the lens (F-stops) & lighting condition.

    Some said F8 is the ideal & what our human eyes see things, is this true?

    What do you use on different subjects & condition? Please share with pics & comments or links. Greatly appreciated.

    Btw, maybe I'm still old school but I thought a good photo starts with the correct base & I don't really fancy too much software tweaking.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    the blue planet
    Posts
    610

    Default Re: What's your take on cranking up ISO?

    i used to like the 18-200 VR but it was not that great in terms of sharpness and distortion though it's been a good walkabout lens for me. i haven't used a 17-55 f2.8 but it might be superior to 18-200 in image quality.
    this site may explain why most digicams are best at f8.
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/diffraction.htm
    cheers.

  3. #3
    Senior Member giantcanopy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    SG
    Posts
    6,232

    Default Re: What's your take on cranking up ISO?

    Quote Originally Posted by NineEleven View Post
    I did some car pics (internal & external) & they turned up great on a borrowed Nikon 17-55 2.8. Then bought an 18-200VR for an all round travel lens but it just doesn't give me the results.
    The 17-55mm is a better made / pro quality zoom, but i have never tried it before though. What aspect did it not give u the results? color ? IQ ? The 18-200mm of course has a smaller aperture compared to the 17-55mm, the later will give u more space in shooting low lights

    Quote Originally Posted by NineEleven View Post
    I see that many landscapes & great pictures were taken with ISO 100 or lesser. Is the tone, sharpness or colour loss on ISO above 400 or 800 that significant? (Can PS later?) Other than the noise issue (I rarely print anything above 8R so it's never an issue) why is it that people scream foul on pushing ISOs high up, especially when we're limited on the lens (F-stops) & lighting condition.

    Some said F8 is the ideal & what our human eyes see things, is this true?
    Because if especially stabilised with a tripod, we would love to take the landscape shots at the optimal settings, and at the lowest cleanest ISO. The noise is visible in the D80 at ISO 800 in well lit places ( at least in my opinion ), might or might not work for you, you have to try and see how it goes.

    I am not too sure who cried foul on pushing high ISOs though ( why? )

    As for aperture, i think the human eyes is pretty flexible. For example in brighter places, the pupil size decreases ( u can try it urself ) and aperture becomes smaller. My guess is the decision in the use of f8 or smaller apertures in landscape photography resides in other decisions such as depth of field etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by NineEleven View Post
    I What do you use on different subjects & condition? Please share with pics & comments or links. Greatly appreciated.
    The subjects and conditions is a pretty wide all encompassing topic? perhaps you can narrow some areas for discussion. Settings and concepts should not differ from shooting film.

    Quote Originally Posted by NineEleven View Post
    Btw, maybe I'm still old school but I thought a good photo starts with the correct base & I don't really fancy too much software tweaking.
    This merits a lengthy discussion, and was recently discussed. you can search up the recent thread for a good read, but shoot and process whatever works for you.

    Ryan
    Last edited by giantcanopy; 7th December 2008 at 12:52 PM.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    bukit batok
    Posts
    1,479

    Default Re: What's your take on cranking up ISO?

    iso 400 is a decent cap on d80 even though iso 800 looks just okay as well.

  5. #5

    Default Re: What's your take on cranking up ISO?

    i used to try to stay clear of higher ISOs. but one day, i read something and basically concurred that a noisy but sharp picture is better than a clean but blur picture.

    and while newer techonology helps with getting cleaner images at similar ISO standards, i won't hesistate just pumping up ISOs with any of my DSLRs.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •