# Do you always shoot in ISO 100?



## tecboy (Sep 24, 2014)

A pro-photographer encourages me to shoot in iso100 all the times.  When I use a speedlight, I always shoot iso 400 to prevent recycle lag time and over draining the battery.  Depending on how well the environment is lit, I can get lowest as iso 100, or if I shoot in still life.  The iso 400 seems to have very good quality in photographs unless I zoom in or cropping large portion of the photograph.  I don't think I can tell the differences between the whole photographs with iso 100 and iso 400.  Do you always shoot in iso 100?


----------



## sscarmack (Sep 24, 2014)

I never shoot at is100 lol.

Unless I'm shooting a studio controlled environment and it coincides with my other settings.

I focus on shutter, and then aperture and iso follows last.


----------



## ruifo (Sep 24, 2014)

Whenever possible, I shoot the lowest native ISO (100 at the D5200 and 64 at the D810). But whenever possible is not even close to always, at all. Moreover, I've been using auto ISO a lot, recently.


----------



## xzyragon (Sep 24, 2014)

ISO is a variable just like any other setting in your camera.

If someone told you that you should always shoot at f7.1 because that's what gives you the sharpest pictures, would you believe them?


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 24, 2014)

Nope.
I'm usually in Manual Mode
with a specific Aperture and specific Shutter selected
I then have ISO Auto from say 50 to 6400 or 100 to 1600 depending upon the situation I'm in.

I've learned to use ISO as part of the entire toolset to get the shot and change when it's just not going to work the way I want it to.


----------



## sm4him (Sep 24, 2014)

Absolutely not. I shoot anywhere between ISO 100 and 3200, all depending on what I'm shooting, where I'm shooting, my lighting and a host of other variables.  I can't imagine anyone who is truly a Pro suggesting that one should ALWAYS shoot at ISO 100, unless they mean for it to be an exercise of some sort.


----------



## sscarmack (Sep 24, 2014)

I'll sacrifice a slightly higher iso for a slightly highly shutter.

1/250 @ 100iso

or

1/1000 @ 800iso

I'd choose 1/000....And I love shooting at the largest aperture 2.8 if possible. Bokeh duh


----------



## PropilotBW (Sep 24, 2014)

I almost never shoot ISO 100 unless I'm trying to shoot a longer exposure.    I usually shooting 400 or 800.  I've always wanted faster shutter speeds while taking pics of my kids.  I've found ISO100 always leaves them as blurry photos


----------



## D-B-J (Sep 24, 2014)

Ish? I shoot from 50 up to 6400 depending on subject matter and lighting conditions. I do often shoot at 100 if I can. Well, maybe my average is 160 or so. Somewhere in there.


----------



## Pejacre (Sep 24, 2014)

I prefer to keep below 3200 but sometimes getting the shot is more important.


----------



## Overread (Sep 24, 2014)

"Keep the ISO as low as you can" is bad advice for a beginner as a general tip for shooting. 

This is because from that point on the beginner will always see ISO as just a noise gain, a detracting element in their photos. That will make them keep the ISO low and will cost them shots, especially if they are shooting anything moving. 

IT also closes their minds to the use of a higher ISO even in a lighting controlled situation, say for boosting the exposure on the background without needing a separate light for the background (or when its not practical or possible to use a separate light to light the background area). 


Myself I think that it will vary depending upon what you shoot, but that you should always aim to use the ISO that will let you get the shot. Noise you can deal with in editing and furthermore resizing for web display or printing will remove a lot more noise from the shot. A good clean exposure at a higher ISO will give you better results than underexposing at a lower ISO; or underexposing and getting blurry detail because your shutter speed was too slow (you can't fix blur in editing*)

So vary it depending what you shoot - when I shoot macro most of the time my ISO is very low, I want a nice sharp clean shot and my flash is the dominant light source; further I don't mind a darker background. 

If I'm shooting wildlife though, unless its a really bright day I'll oft start at ISO 400 or even ISO 800 and see what aperture and shutter speed combination I can get. I know I want at least 1/500sec - and ideally a lot more.

Use the ISO - its a very powerful tool and in most modern cameras you can get very good results - I'd certainly not worry about ISO 800 on modern cameras.


*at least not without spending hours rebuilding an area that might not even have any data in the shot or before or after shots to build from - ergo you're basically drawing in the fix.


----------



## Stradawhovious (Sep 24, 2014)

No. No I do not.



MY OPINION HAS BEEN HEARD!


----------



## chuasam (Sep 24, 2014)

I shoot at 64 because I want the minimum depth of field in the studio


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SCraig (Sep 24, 2014)

I can't think of one single setting on my camera that I use "All The Time".  I can think of several I would never use though.


----------



## runnah (Sep 24, 2014)

60% of the time, I use it all the time.


----------



## ronlane (Sep 24, 2014)

No, I use what I need to get the shot. I do like to keep it as low as possible but after watching a video on street photography on KelbyOne and seeing the images that were shot in daylight at 1600, I started trying it myself with good success.

As Overread says, I once thought of it as the noise part of the equation.


----------



## lambertpix (Sep 24, 2014)

44% of the shots I took this year were at ISO 100, according to LR.


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 24, 2014)

tecboy said:


> A pro-photographer encourages me to shoot in iso100 all the times.


I actually talk about this in my DSLR class...I call it 'the ISO bias'.  I tell the students that they might hear/see advice (usually from older photographers) that staying with the lowest ISO is the best way to shoot.

Of course, shooting at a lower ISO is almost always preferable because if gives you the least amount of digital noise.  But if you have a good understanding of exposure (shutter speed, ISO and aperture) then you can make smart decisions about when to use a higher ISO.

The example I give is this:  
Imagine that you want to shoot (photograph  ) your kids playing and your settings are F5.6, 1/50 and ISO 100.
Is 1/50 fast enough to freeze kids running around?  No, it's not.
So if you raise your ISO to 200, you can then have a shutter speed of 1/100.  If you raise your ISO to 400, your shutter speed would be 1/200.
Is 1/200 going to freeze the action?  Probably.
So there is a significant difference between 1/50 and 1/200, when it comes to freezing motion.  
What is the difference in the amount of noise, with a modern DSLR, between 100 and 400?  It is very little difference, I'd even call it negligible for most uses.
So in this case, raising the ISO was clearly the right choice.  

Then I have another example where the settings are 1/2000, F5.6 and ISO 6400.  Again, shooting a moving subject.
Is 1/2000 going to freeze a subject, almost certainly.  But could we get away with a slower shutter speed and still freeze the action?  What if we change the shutter speed to 1/1000?  It would allow us to use an ISO of 3200.  If we went to 1/500, we could further reduce the ISO to 1600.
Now, are we going to see the difference in the amount of noise between ISO 6400 and 1600?  Probably we would.  Would we see the difference in motion (of kids) between 1/2000 and 1/500?  Probably not.
So in this case, it makes sense to lower the ISO.

The key thing is to understand when changing the ISO (or either of the other settings) will give you a more beneficial combination for the situation that you are in.


----------



## Solarflare (Sep 24, 2014)

You can shoot at ISO 100 and nothing else if you're in the studio.

I dont even have a studio.

Thus I shoot at ISO 100-25600, depending upon light, which the maximum of my current camera.

A Sony A7s with native ISO 100.000 would be awesome for my needs. Except of course that camera has certain problems.

I use flash whenever its a good idea, but of course that doesnt always work.


----------



## CameraClicker (Sep 24, 2014)

I use ISO 200 a lot.  Faster and clean enough.  'coarse I also use much higher values as necessary.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 24, 2014)

I dont shoot at iso 100 or even 200 that much, unless i have enough light to get a decent shutter speed.


----------



## Braineack (Sep 24, 2014)

Nope.  Rather worry about getting the shot.


----------



## rexbobcat (Sep 24, 2014)

Whenever possible, which is mostly when using flash or in broad daylight. I us the 6D, which only goes to 1/4000, so it's sometimes difficult to shoot at higher ISOs when using apertures of f/2.8 and wider.

But then, I don't see any point in using higher ISOs in the first place when my shutter speed is above 1/1000.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 24, 2014)

Overread said:
			
		

> "*Keep the ISO as low as you can" is bad advice for a beginner as a general tip for shooting.*



This, ^^^^, to the tenth power!

Techboy, the "professional" photographer telling you to ,"Always shoot at ISO 100," is an idiot and a fool. Have you thought that he might be giving you deliberately BAD advice?

Seriously...anybody who advocates always using ISO 100 has a very,very, VERY limited grasp of the photographic process.

Oh, by the way--ALWAYS drive in second gear, between 1,500 RPM and as high as,oh, around 7,500 RPM....you get a LOT MORE TORQUE that way, you know, in second gear!!! Whatever the speed, ALWAYS drive in second gear!


----------



## JerryVenz (Sep 24, 2014)

tecboy said:


> A pro-photographer encourages me to shoot in iso100 all the times.  When I use a speedlight, I always shoot iso 400 to prevent recycle lag time and over draining the battery.  Depending on how well the environment is lit, I can get lowest as iso 100, or if I shoot in still life.  The iso 400 seems to have very good quality in photographs unless I zoom in or cropping large portion of the photograph.  I don't think I can tell the differences between the whole photographs with iso 100 and iso 400.  Do you always shoot in iso 100?


----------



## Overread (Sep 24, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think it can be a few things, such as :
1) Someone who might well have good skills, but who operates within a more niche segment of situations. So they might be shooting all day, every day in a studio with more than enough lights and skill to never need to touch the ISO (save on the odd occasion or when doing something - out of the ordinary). Thus to them its good solid advice that applies to them directly. 

2) "Its just one of those things you say to newbies" not in a condescending way or an attempt to keep the newbies as newbies; but more that a lot of people who don't teach don't know how to teach. So when asked questions they can even end up giving stock advice - and keep the ISO low is a very stock reply. It's short, simple, quick and can many times actually work.

3) An attempt to make it 2 instead of 3 settings to balance. When starting out photography can be confusing - if you can disregard one whole setting and now only have to balance 2 (because you're keeping the ISO low so don't have to change it); its now a lot easier to grasp the relationship between aperture and shutter speed. Thus it can be advice that works for a good few new photographers (who yes will go and pass it on to others).

4) It's good advice for today (option 3) but they've not considered that down the line they've then got to almost un-teach someone the whole "Keep the ISO low" mantra; except by then that person has already got that habit in their system and process. It's a flawed approach because its a lot easier to teach something once and teach it right than it is to twist things and teach something twice, thrice etc...

I'm sure there are more reasons but those would strike me as common sources of the repetition of the line.


----------



## JerryVenz (Sep 24, 2014)

As a full time professional portrait photographer I.S.O. is merely a tool to get me to the F-STOP  needed for a given subject.
When doing a family portrait, say in the shade of a tree, an hour before sunset, to use f6.3 or f7.1, for adequate depth of field, I must START at 400 ISO. Then as the light starts to fade or I do some individuals of the kids I'll go to 800 ISO.
With a professional, full-frame, DSLR noise is not an issue at these ISO's.


----------



## runnah (Sep 24, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Oh, by the way--ALWAYS drive in second gear, between 1,500 RPM and as high as,oh, around 7,500 RPM....you get a LOT MORE TORQUE that way, you know, in second gear!!! Whatever the speed, ALWAYS drive in second gear!



Well you will certainly get a lot of noise doing that!


----------



## lambertpix (Sep 24, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Oh, by the way--ALWAYS drive in second gear, between 1,500 RPM and as high as,oh, around 7,500 RPM....you get a LOT MORE TORQUE that way, you know, in second gear!!! Whatever the speed, ALWAYS drive in second gear!



Truth be told, 2nd gear really is a lot of fun.  ;-)


----------



## runnah (Sep 24, 2014)

lambertpix said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, by the way--ALWAYS drive in second gear, between 1,500 RPM and as high as,oh, around 7,500 RPM....you get a LOT MORE TORQUE that way, you know, in second gear!!! Whatever the speed, ALWAYS drive in second gear!
> ...




You haven't lived until you've gotten second gear rubber.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 24, 2014)

I shoot in the lowest native ISO I can get away with. That said, these days it's pretty hard to tell the diff between ISO 100 and 400 (on newer cameras, anyway).

In big rooms where I need to bounce a flash off a high ceiling, I'll crank the ISO up to 400-800 without batting an eye.

If you use flash a lot... get an external rechargeable battery. Best money you can spend.


----------



## limr (Sep 24, 2014)

2nd gear is fun until the torque drops off 

I do like 100 ISO, but looking in my fridge, it appears that all the film I have at the moment is either 200 or 400, excluding a few rolls of Pan F 50, which I love, and 2 rolls of Delta 3200, which I haven't tried yet because I'm oddly nervous about it.

I actually took a few shots with my boyfriend's Pentax K5 and it didn't even occur to me to change the ISO. This whole discussion is quite foreign to me, but still kinda interesting.

Overread's third point makes sense - maybe it's a suggestion to help keep students from being overwhelmed by too many options, because that can actually be quite crippling, and not just in photography. It seems to me similar to having students stick to one focal length at first, or how Photography 101 classes that still teach film have students only use black and white film (and usually only Tri-X).  Limit the variables at first, and then add more options.

Of course, if it's just one pro telling others that it's the best way, the ONLY way, because that's what works for him...well then that's just silly.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 24, 2014)

Hey I do a lot of night photography and am often tempted to shoot ISO 100 however i blow out some of the bright city lights.  I don't know where to find a happy medium.  What do you all do in a situation like this?


----------



## Gary A. (Sep 25, 2014)

I rarely use flash and I shoot a lot of low light situations. I don't flinch shooting at 6400 ... well maybe I'll think twice for 6400 ... but when necessary I'll dial it in.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

Gary A. said:


> I rarely use flash and I shoot a lot of low light situations. I don't flinch shooting at 6400 ... well maybe I'll think twice for 6400 ... but when necessary I'll dial it in.


That's pretty impressive.  I feel I need to use my tripod when I shot 1/20 sec or lower or else I have way too much movement.  Kudos to your for having such a steady hand


----------



## unpopular (Sep 25, 2014)

Concerning noise, ISO will not actually change the sensitivity of the sensor, rather, it will apply analog gain the chip. So, your sensor, unlike film, remains at a constant sensitivity regardless of ISO setting. This is important, because every sensor has an native ISO where the gain is going to be neutral. Attenuation of the sensor actually will impact dynamic range, esp in the hilights. While it is true that the shutter is open longer at lower than native ISO, I'm not really sure that noise quality improves enough to justify it. Furthermore, in some cases the thermal noise might be problematic more at ISO 100 than the shorter exposure at the native ISO.

So in my opinion, the only time to shoot at lower than native ISO is to increase DOF. Still, I think it's probably better to use an ND.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

unpopular said:


> Concerning noise, ISO will not actually change the sensitivity of the sensor, rather, it will apply analog gain the chip. So, your sensor, unlike film, remains at a constant sensitivity regardless of ISO setting. This is important, because every sensor has an native ISO where the gain is going to be neutral. Attenuation of the sensor actually will impact dynamic range, esp in the hilights. While it is true that the shutter is open longer at lower than native ISO, I'm not really sure that noise quality improves enough to justify it. Furthermore, in some cases the thermal noise might be problematic more at ISO 100 than the shorter exposure at the native ISO.
> 
> So in my opinion, the only time to shoot at lower than native ISO is to increase DOF. Still, I think it's probably better to use an ND.



Yeah the noise really gets to me.  I'm going to try that.  Wish I could try to duplicate this shot again and try it the way you are suggesting.  Do you think a better lens that could produce a sharper image would make any difference?  Because sometimes I tend to blame it on the lens I am currently shooting with.


----------



## unpopular (Sep 25, 2014)

As for shooting at the lowest possible ISO, I think it's sound advice in general. But always shooting at ISO 100 (or any given ISO) is kind of silly.  Obviously you don't want to shoot a non-moving subject at ISO 1600 at 1/4000 when you could just as easily do it at ISO 200 at 1/500.

Shooting at the lowest ISO possible, i.e. the bottom of the setting list is a not a good idea period, and may actually do more harm (as I noted above).

That said, I typically shoot at ISO 200, this is changing now that I an XE1, but regardless, I still keep the ISO as low as possible while still able to get the results I want. I also tend to shoot around f/8 and wider (typically f/4-5.6), so that makes things a bit easier.


----------



## NedM (Sep 25, 2014)

I set my aperture, then shutter speed, then lastly my ISO. Although, my aperture usually stays constant, I'm always fiddling between my shutter and ISO.


----------



## bratkinson (Sep 25, 2014)

I agree with Derrel 100% - I, too, like driving my car in 2nd gear regardless of where I go!

I think the last time I shot at ISO 100 (ASA 100) was some Ektachrome 100 I had about 1980, give or take.  When Ektachrome 200 came out, I made the switch and shot that for the rest of my film days.

These days, ISO 1600-2400 for daylight and 2400-12000 for inside or after dark are my most often used ISO speeds.  If I have an issue with noise, I have several post processing options to clear it up amazingly well!


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

unpopular said:


> As for shooting at the lowest possible ISO, I think it's sound advice in general. But always shooting at ISO 100 (or any given ISO) is kind of silly.  Obviously you don't want to shoot a non-moving subject at ISO 1600 at 1/4000 when you could just as easily do it at ISO 200 at 1/500.
> 
> Shooting at the lowest ISO possible, i.e. the bottom of the setting list is a not a good idea period, and may actually do more harm (as I noted above).
> 
> That said, I typically shoot at ISO 200, this is changing now that I an XE1, but regardless, I still keep the ISO as low as possible while still able to get the results I want. I also tend to shoot around f/8 and wider (typically f/4-5.6), so that makes things a bit easier.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

bratkinson said:


> I agree with Derrel 100% - I, too, like driving my car in 2nd gear regardless of where I go!
> 
> I think the last time I shot at ISO 100 (ASA 100) was some Ektachrome 100 I had about 1980, give or take.  When Ektachrome 200 came out, I made the switch and shot that for the rest of my film days.
> 
> These days, ISO 1600-2400 for daylight and 2400-12000 for inside or after dark are my most often used ISO speeds.  If I have an issue with noise, I have several post processing options to clear it up amazingly well!


I always try to leave my shutter open as long as possible to keep my ISO low during nighttime shots.  Without washing out the image of course.  

Do you mind sharing what post processing options you typically use?  I want to start to learn more about what works best for people and the steps they take to achieve the best end result.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

NedM said:


> I set my aperture, then shutter speed, then lastly my ISO. Although, my aperture usually stays constant, I'm always fiddling between my shutter and ISO.


That's generally what I do too and then take a test shot and see where my settings need to be adjusted.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

bratkinson said:


> I agree with Derrel 100% - I, too, like driving my car in 2nd gear regardless of where I go!
> 
> I think the last time I shot at ISO 100 (ASA 100) was some Ektachrome 100 I had about 1980, give or take.  When Ektachrome 200 came out, I made the switch and shot that for the rest of my film days.
> 
> These days, ISO 1600-2400 for daylight and 2400-12000 for inside or after dark are my most often used ISO speeds.  If I have an issue with noise, I have several post processing options to clear it up amazingly well!





limr said:


> 2nd gear is fun until the torque drops off
> 
> I do like 100 ISO, but looking in my fridge, it appears that all the film I have at the moment is either 200 or 400, excluding a few rolls of Pan F 50, which I love, and 2 rolls of Delta 3200, which I haven't tried yet because I'm oddly nervous about it.
> 
> ...



That's really interesting.  I think that shooting with film is a great way to fully understand your settings and how to achieve our vision correctly.  I think I get spoiled sometimes when shooting digital.

It took me a long time to get where I am today and through a lot of trial and error, and seeking help and advice from other more advanced photographers.

It's always great to hear other peoples suggestions and try to attack the issue in different ways.  Thanks for your input


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

bratkinson said:


> I agree with Derrel 100% - I, too, like driving my car in 2nd gear regardless of where I go!
> 
> I think the last time I shot at ISO 100 (ASA 100) was some Ektachrome 100 I had about 1980, give or take.  When Ektachrome 200 came out, I made the switch and shot that for the rest of my film days.
> 
> These days, ISO 1600-2400 for daylight and 2400-12000 for inside or after dark are my most often used ISO speeds.  If I have an issue with noise, I have several post processing options to clear it up amazingly well!



I al


manaheim said:


> I shoot in the lowest native ISO I can get away with. That said, these days it's pretty hard to tell the diff between ISO 100 and 400 (on newer cameras, anyway).
> 
> In big rooms where I need to bounce a flash off a high ceiling, I'll crank the ISO up to 400-800 without batting an eye.
> 
> If you use flash a lot... get an external rechargeable battery. Best money you can spend.



Believe it or not I don't own a flash.  Besides the one on top of my camera.  It completely scares me at the present time.  I really want to learn and understand lighting better so I am able to expand my creativity and learn new techniques.  I get comfortable in my level and forget there is so much more to learn.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

lambertpix said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, by the way--ALWAYS drive in second gear, between 1,500 RPM and as high as,oh, around 7,500 RPM....you get a LOT MORE TORQUE that way, you know, in second gear!!! Whatever the speed, ALWAYS drive in second gear!
> ...


 

ha ah


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

JerryVenz said:


> As a full time professional portrait photographer I.S.O. is merely a tool to get me to the F-STOP  needed for a given subject.
> When doing a family portrait, say in the shade of a tree, an hour before sunset, to use f6.3 or f7.1, for adequate depth of field, I must START at 400 ISO. Then as the light starts to fade or I do some individuals of the kids I'll go to 800 ISO.
> With a professional, full-frame, DSLR noise is not an issue at these ISO's.



Thank you!  Your information and comments are really helpful.  I need to practice more with my settings under different light conditions and see what produces the best end results that I am happy with.


----------



## iLOVEhatephoto.com (Sep 25, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Thank you for chiming in.  I appreciate it.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 25, 2014)

lambertpix said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, by the way--ALWAYS drive in second gear, between 1,500 RPM and as high as,oh, around 7,500 RPM....you get a LOT MORE TORQUE that way, you know, in second gear!!! Whatever the speed, ALWAYS drive in second gear!
> ...



Well, in a Nash rambler it can be...


----------



## KenC (Sep 25, 2014)

As someone said earlier (I just skimmed all the replies quickly), only when I want a really slow shutter speed.  When my camera is not on a tripod (more often than not, as I walk around on city streets where this would be difficult or impossible) my "base" ISO is 400 and I often step up to 800, sometimes 1600 (this is with a T2i, not full frame).  I don't see any difference between 100 and 400 under any normal viewing conditions and I have to look very closely to see any at 800.

The best advice for beginners probably is to start at 400.  Most of the time this will give reasonable results and the times when it doesn't will be "teaching moments" for the beginner.  Most DSLR's have at least a 1/4000 shutter speed, so even on sunny days 400 is useable.


----------



## Gary A. (Sep 25, 2014)

iLOVEhatephoto.com said:


> Gary A. said:
> 
> 
> > I rarely use flash and I shoot a lot of low light situations. I don't flinch shooting at 6400 ... well maybe I'll think twice for 6400 ... but when necessary I'll dial it in.
> ...


The reason I shoot at higher ISO's is so I can use faster shutter speeds.

One should previsualize the final image before releasing the shutter then adjust the aperture/shutter speed/ISO on the camera to reflect your mental image. Using only one ISO sensitivity would significantly reduce the ability of the photographer to capture their previsualized image.

Gary

Some samples of low light-high ISO stuff (no noise reduction applied):

#1





Camera    FUJIFILM X-T1
ISO    3200
Focal Length    200mm (300mm in 35mm)
Aperture    f/9
Exposure Time    0.004s (1/250)

#2




Camera    Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II
ISO    1600
Focal Length    200mm (200mm in 35mm)
Aperture    f/2.8
Exposure Time    0.025s (1/40)

#3




Camera    Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II
ISO    1600
Focal Length    200mm (200mm in 35mm)
Aperture    f/2.8
Exposure Time    0.01s (1/100)

#4




Camera    FUJIFILM X-E2
ISO    3200
Focal Length    12mm (18mm in 35mm)
Aperture    f/5
Exposure Time    0.0055s (1/180)

#5




Canon EOS 5D
ISO    1600
Focal Length    70mm (70mm in 35mm)
Aperture    f/2.8
Exposure Time    0.0222s (1/45)

#6




Camera    FUJIFILM X-Pro1
ISO    6400
Focal Length    8mm (fish)
Exposure Time    0.0166s (1/60)


----------



## unpopular (Sep 25, 2014)

^^^ with all fairness, the x-trans is a really good high ISO sensor, You're not likely going to get these results from a traditional CMOS of similar format and price point. But Fuji cameras aren't necessarily everyone, either.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Sep 25, 2014)

I usually am on 200 or higher, depending on light. If it's BRIGHT sun or strobes, then I'll drop to 100. Film, I shoot 160, 100, 400, etc.


----------



## Gary A. (Sep 25, 2014)

unpopular said:


> ^^^ with all fairness, the x-trans is a really good high ISO sensor, You're not likely going to get these results from a traditional CMOS of similar format and price point. But Fuji cameras aren't necessarily everyone, either.


50% of the posted images were captured with a traditional CMOS sensor.  I do not understand your point. I was reacting to a post by ILOVEHATEPHOTO.COM who had quoted me. I wanted to punctuate my response with examples of low light/high ISO images as well as address the OP with why a photographer should not be stuck with only one ISO. I had no intent of addressing ISO noise or the pros/cons of Fuji cameras.

I like your avatar.

Gary


----------



## gsgary (Sep 26, 2014)

Only if I have iso100 film in my camera


----------



## xFireSoul (Sep 26, 2014)

Only when it is too bright and I am outside. Otherwise depends on the lighting.


----------



## bratkinson (Sep 26, 2014)

Long exposures at night or low-light indoors have always been a goal of mine, dating back to maybe 1970 or so.  For fixed objects (like the Magic Kingdom Castle at Disneyland at dusk in 1977), a tripod is a must...or, at Disneyland, a convenient flat-top garbage can to put my camera on for 10-20 second exposures).  But these days, I'm photographing mostly people, and to reliably freeze action, I need a shutter speed of about 1/160th and faster.  Slower will result in subject motion blur many times.  Gary A's photos above were likely one or two of <some number> that successfully froze subject motion.  But when the subject is motionless for the duration of the shutter open, the results are often nothing less than spectacular.  Gary A's results are definitely in the spectacular range, in my estimation.

My digital quest for low light shooting proved that 'common knowledge' on the subject is right...fast glass and fast ISO speeds with low noise.  Getting both is not cheap, by any means.  But the advances in noise reduction capabilities both in camera (for JPG outputs) and in post processing have greatly facilitated the handling of noise and getting good results.  I'm just a 'hack' when it comes to Lightroom noise handling.  I just 'fiddle with the sliders' until I'm happy.  Since adding Photoshop Elements to my post processing 'routine', the single noise reduction slider was good enough for my tastes.  Then, after reading about the Noiseware add-in, I bought that.  That product has perhaps a dozen pre-sets that produces results considerably better than I ever had before, and better than my fiddling with their sliders.  There are other add-in products as well as stand alone products out there as well that handle noise.  I found one that works for me and I'm happy.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 26, 2014)

iLOVEhatephoto.com said:


> Hey I do a lot of night photography and am often tempted to shoot ISO 100 however i blow out some of the bright city lights.  I don't know where to find a happy medium.  What do you all do in a situation like this?  View attachment 85244



I do a ton of night photography and always use the lowest possible ISO I can (and a tripod). So usually ISO 100. I'm confused as to how lights would get blown out on a lower ISO vs a higher one.


----------



## runnah (Sep 26, 2014)

manaheim said:


> iLOVEhatephoto.com said:
> 
> 
> > Hey I do a lot of night photography and am often tempted to shoot ISO 100 however i blow out some of the bright city lights.  I don't know where to find a happy medium.  What do you all do in a situation like this?  View attachment 85244
> ...



Less burn in due to a shorter exposure.


----------



## bribrius (Sep 26, 2014)

huh. I looked and saw my camera was on iso 100 yesterday. it was in auto iso. immediately considered it was maxed out trying to drop that low on auto iso. so I increased the shutter speed until it went back up to the 300 range.


----------



## sscarmack (Sep 26, 2014)

Heck, I was shooting at 12,800 yesterday hahahhaa


----------



## manaheim (Sep 26, 2014)

runnah said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > iLOVEhatephoto.com said:
> ...



But... you can get the same burn in at a faster rate with a higher ISO.  And it's not like the highlights are going to burn in faster just because it takes longer to expose.

Unless I'm really missing something...


----------



## Derrel (Sep 26, 2014)

manaheim said:
			
		

> I do a ton of night photography and always use the lowest possible ISO I can (and a tripod). So usually ISO 100. I'm confused as to how lights would get blown out on a lower ISO vs a higher one.



Exactly...at the lowest ISO, the dynamic range of virtually every digital camera is at its peak; with the new Nikons the lab results are in the 13.7 to 14 EV range at Base ISO; by the time the ISO is jacked up two stops, there's more or less a two EV drop in total dynamic range...so..."bridging the gap" between the highlights and the upper level tones in a night shot is easiest* at the lowest ISO setting...*

The other poster mentioned blowing out the lights in a night scene; that's not a factor of using low ISO, but it is a factor of exposing too long for the lights. The goal ought to be to get the lights exposed decently, and then to "lift the shadows" in software, post-capture. This process, of exposing to keep the highlights use-able, but then lifting the shadows, has become easier and easier as sensors have grown better AND as software has become better. Lightroom 4 was Adobe's master stroke at designing software that is so smart that it can basically, auto-analyze images, and create seamless, on-the-fly automatic masking, and allow the photographer to do incredible software adjustments-INSTANTLY--in a way that simply was not possible before Lightroom 4 was made.

Tonal Adjustments in the Age of Lightroom 4


----------



## unpopular (Sep 29, 2014)

Gary A. said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > ^^^ with all fairness, the x-trans is a really good high ISO sensor, You're not likely going to get these results from a traditional CMOS of similar format and price point. But Fuji cameras aren't necessarily everyone, either.
> ...



My point was just that that Fuji sensor is an excellent low-light performer and that it's not for everyone. That's all, nothing more, nothing less.

The 5D is also full-frame, which again isn't right for everyone (due to cost).


----------



## unpopular (Sep 29, 2014)

BTW- even here the traditional CMOS examples are far inferior to the X-Pro, at least in terms of noise and sharpness.


----------



## petrochemist (Sep 29, 2014)

One of my cameras doesn't actually go lower than ISO200.
Many of the others are usually set around ISO400, but as with all the controls the actual value used will depend on the situation.
If shooting static subjects in a fully controlled environment there is probably no need to vary from the cameras base ISO, but for real world photography it's terrible advice - are you sure he didn't want to rule you out as a future competitor?


----------



## Bobby Ironsights (Oct 3, 2014)

I shoot at ISO 100-25600, depending upon light


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 3, 2014)

I wished I could 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gary A. (Oct 3, 2014)

unpopular said:


> BTW- even here the traditional CMOS examples are far inferior to the X-Pro, at least in terms of noise and sharpness.



The X-Trans is a very good sensor but it isn't magical. But it does je ne se qua ... at least to my eye. 





ISO 3200

Gary


----------



## acparsons (Oct 3, 2014)

I've recently started using Auto ISO up to 400, sometimes auto is miscalculated with some  lenses. It's pretty good because I am usually moving when shooting. On my camera, I lose Dynamic range at 100.


----------



## EIngerson (Oct 3, 2014)

Overread, great advice.

OP, there is no "setting" that is set in stone with photography. settings are situationally dependent on light.


----------



## JustJazzie (Oct 3, 2014)

Hmm, my Nikon is on auto Iso capped at 6400 most of the time. My Sony I try to keep at 1600 or less if I can. Most often between 4-800. Even when using a flash I think I keep it at 200-400 for faster recycle time.


----------



## TheStunch (Oct 4, 2014)

when I tripod up, I use lowest iso I can, unless I'm photographing the stars or something, when I'm off tripod, I'll let the lighting dictate.  On some cameras I know you can set your auto iso range, and if noise is a concern, sometimes I'll dial down the top end iso setting, to where the noise is more manageable, if I need the high iso sensitivity.

One of my cameras actually looks really nice at high iso with good glass on it, kind of a film-y quality to it, especially in b&w, so I'll let the auto iso run wild on that one, if the project would benefit from a film look.


----------



## bc_steve (Oct 4, 2014)

JustJazzie said:


> Hmm, my Nikon is on auto Iso capped at 6400 most of the time. My Sony I try to keep at 1600 or less if I can. Most often between 4-800. Even when using a flash I think I keep it at 200-400 for faster recycle time.


I do the same thing.  I have it set to auto-ISO with a maximum of 6400, but if I am shooting on a tripod I will set it to manual ISO and if I have enough light I will set it to 100.


----------



## JustJazzie (Oct 4, 2014)

bc_steve said:


> JustJazzie said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm, my Nikon is on auto Iso capped at 6400 most of the time. My Sony I try to keep at 1600 or less if I can. Most often between 4-800. Even when using a flash I think I keep it at 200-400 for faster recycle time.
> ...


There are times I over ride it for sure. 

Shamefully, I apparently lied in this thread. Looking at my exif data for my iced web picture I shot it at iso 100, 1/50. It was supposed to be on a tripod but I couldn't get it balanced on that part of the hill and I forgot to change my settings, no wonder it wasn't sharp. :-( so let me amend my statement to "if I'm shooting after my first cup of coffee, and I actually think about what the heck I'm doing, then I don't worry about staying at iso 100"


----------



## bc_steve (Oct 4, 2014)

the one that gets me is when I am shooting at night, and I've set it to some high ISO and forget to switch it back to auto.  Then the next day I end up taking high ISO shots in broad daylight...


----------



## snowbear (Oct 4, 2014)

bc_steve said:


> the one that gets me is when I am shooting at night, and I've set it to some high ISO and forget to switch it back to auto.  Then the next day I end up taking high ISO shots in broad daylight...


Oh, I've done that a couple of times.


----------



## dannylightning (Oct 4, 2014)

I would always shoot at 100 if that was possible but its not so I will shoot with What ever ISO is needed.   Its dark and cloudy today,  here is one i just shot at 6400 ISO, it turned out pretty descent.


----------



## chuasam (Dec 25, 2014)

Most of my images seem to be at ISO 64 or ISO 400


----------



## Ian63 (Dec 25, 2014)

D-B-J said:


> I shoot from 50 up to 6400 depending on subject matter and lighting conditions. I do often shoot at 100 if I can. Well, maybe my average is 160 or so. Somewhere in there.


It has  already been said... I also do exactly as  quoted


----------



## Nettles (Dec 25, 2014)

tecboy said:


> A pro-photographer encourages me to shoot in iso100 all the times.



Seems to me that's strange pro advice. But maybe it's tailored to your favoured subject?


----------



## KmH (Dec 25, 2014)

What the pro likely said was "Shoot at ISO 100 whenever you can."
Not all DSLR cameras can shoot effectively at ISO 100, because ISO 100 is not a native ISO setting for all DSLR cameras.

It seems fairly obvious the OP's first language is not English and some subtleties of syntax and word meaning may not be readily apparent to the OP.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 25, 2014)

KmH said:


> What the pro likely said was "Shoot at ISO 100 whenever you can."
> Not all DSLR cameras can shoot effectively at ISO 100, because ISO 100 is not a native ISO setting for all DSLR cameras.
> 
> It seems fairly obvious the OP's first language is not English and some subtleties of syntax and word meaning may not be readily apparent to the OP.



Ummmm.... He told me to shoot at ISO 100 no matter what!


----------



## tecboy (Dec 25, 2014)

He asked me what iso that I shoot regularly.  I told him my iso is vary. When I shoot indoor and I'm not in the mood using a speedlite, the iso is higher around 3200 to 6400.  The photographs is pretty good with light cropping and little noise reduction.  When I do use speedlite, I set the iso to auto, so the iso is alway 400 with speedlite turned on.  This photographer is a little odd. He told me to use iso 100 on everything and all lighting situations.  Beside, I don't always use iso 100.


----------



## robbins.photo (Dec 25, 2014)

tecboy said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > What the pro likely said was "Shoot at ISO 100 whenever you can."
> ...



Well hate to have to be the one to say it but if he told you to shoot at ISO 100 no matter what then he gave you really bad advice.  Shoot at the ISO you need to get the shot.  If you can add light or setup a shot so that ISO happens to be 100, great - but unless you only shoot in a studio with all the time in the world and all the lighting you want at your disposal, well you'd be missing a ton of shots if all you ever shot was ISO 100.  In fact I don't think I have more than maybe one or two pictures in my entire flickr stream that was shot at anything below ISO 400 - I just don't usually have that much light to work with to get my desired shutter speed.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 25, 2014)

tecboy said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > What the pro likely said was "Shoot at ISO 100 whenever you can."
> ...



In a perfect world, yes, always shoot in ISO 100...provided that is your camera's Native ISO....it's ISO 200 for most Nikons. 

Anyways, It's always best to shoot in the lowest ISO but it's not always possible. I shoot our son's indoor basketball games for example. Indoor sports sounds great but the lightning isn't all that great. I have to open the lens up wide open and bump the ISO up to ISO 6400...sometimes higher. I also shoot some astrophotography and its best to bump up the ISO 400-1600. 

Shooting exclusively on one setting(s) is about like shooting in Auto and it takes creative control out of your hands and gives it back to the camera...aka snap shots.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Dec 25, 2014)

tecboy said:


> A pro-photographer encourages me to shoot in iso100 all the times.  When I use a speedlight, I always shoot iso 400 to prevent recycle lag time and over draining the battery.  Depending on how well the environment is lit, I can get lowest as iso 100, or if I shoot in still life.  The iso 400 seems to have very good quality in photographs unless I zoom in or cropping large portion of the photograph.  I don't think I can tell the differences between the whole photographs with iso 100 and iso 400.  Do you always shoot in iso 100?


 
Tecboy...unless I'm shooting a 1.4 wide open...NEVER!

I shoot in rough light most of the time. I'm a social documentary photog, not a tripod / setup photog. The doc photog prides themselves in bringing home the goods in whatever light they find themselves in.

Shot this Xmas morning on my bi-annual trip to church with my wife. Only one shot could do. It came out decent for one shot candid.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...munion_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

(nsfw)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...i_Gras_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...ggalos_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe..._no._2_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg


----------



## bribrius (Dec 25, 2014)

I shoot iso 100 for everything. sometimes the photos come out really dark but that is okay. Same with shutter. I never shoot under a four hundred shutter even at night. again, sometimes they are a little dark.


----------



## bratkinson (Dec 26, 2014)

bribrius said:


> I shoot iso 100 for everything. sometimes the photos come out really dark but that is okay. Same with shutter. I never shoot under a four hundred shutter even at night. again, sometimes they are a little dark.


Try as one may, you'll never get a shot like the one below at ISO 100 without subject blur, and camera motion blur as this was handheld - 1/250th at f2.5 ISO 4000.


 Limiting yourself to ISO 100 unconditionally limits your photography to well lit, mostly daylight photographs.  If that works for you, great.  But if you want to shoot in less well-lit situations, ISO speeds will have to be increased.


----------



## JTPhotography (Dec 26, 2014)

I think your "pro" photographer here was talking referring to times when studio flash is being used. In that case you may be able to get away with it most of the time. For outdoor/nature/landscape use, sometimes but not all the time. ISO is a tool, a powerful one. If you shoot in manual you know what I mean. A good workflow would be start with ISO, for quality purposes, choose the lowest you can get away with in the light conditions, then set your SS and aperture, then come back to ISO if you can't get those two where you want them. Of course, none of this is set in stone. For example, when I shoot with my 85 1.4, I almost always shoot it wide open, in that case, if I am outside on a bright day, I'll set at ISO 50-100 because I know I'll be at the top end of my SS.


----------



## KenC (Dec 26, 2014)

Why, oh why, did we start this one up again?


----------



## bribrius (Dec 26, 2014)

KenC said:


> Why, oh why, did we start this one up again?


s.o.s.

I am more interested in understanding the benefits of shooting higher iso on purpose for effects and color. same with over exposing for effects and color.


----------



## Rick58 (Dec 26, 2014)

KenC said:


> Why, oh why, did we start this one up again?


I've been bleeding from my lower lip trying to avoid commenting. Ive never heard of anything quite as obsurd. Let's just say I'm not quite ready to super glue my ISO dial at 100.
Let's go back to discussing which camera I should buy. I need an adrenaline rush. Sorry, Sarcasm isn't usually my M.O. but really..Shoot only at 100?


----------



## bribrius (Dec 26, 2014)

Rick58 said:


> KenC said:
> 
> 
> > Why, oh why, did we start this one up again?
> ...


it isn't realistic. it isn't even shooting. Depends on what you are shooting and when. I tend to let iso float to get a idea of where it will run ahead of time. And just moving around the same scene from different light levels it can change quite dramatically.  if it starts getting to high I lower the shutter speed. if I get too low on shutter I lock down the iso and start thinking of a place to set the camera down for a longer exposure. I am starting to worry more about higher iso now, just because I don't like cleaning up the noise level in post and I don't always want that much noise in the photo.  Also higher iso really frigs with how crisp a photo is and how clean it is. sometimes a cool effect often not wanted. so I float the iso with a limiter (depending on what I am shooting 1200,3200,4000 etc. and if it comes down to it will just lock it in once I get a idea of where it is running. Occasionally I will preplan the photo being dark, lower iso but already have the ss as low as I dare to go and have a idea what I can bring back in post from shadow. I try not to count on post though it is really a hack way of shooting..


----------



## bribrius (Dec 26, 2014)

I hate to bring this up too. But some people choose to shoot full manual without considering the camera can still give you info so you are taking less "test" shots. I don't often shoot auto but will flip to auto iso or put it in auto just to see where the camera is running to give myself a little more clarity in what I am looking at. Then I flip back to manual and make my adjustments. I don't know if there is a right way or wrong way to do this but whatever info the camera is willing to give me I take.  If in auto iso I am in the 2k range on a 250 shutter I know I can drop down to the 1k and under range on a 100 shutter.  if I have my iso limit around 1200 and see the camera drop the ss down to some crazy low level that will cause camera blur I need to reevaluate my need for where I set my aperture or consider another alternative.  so I use the modes more as a guide and will often flip over to one to get a idea of where i am at even if I shoot manual. Just what I do, there is no right or wrong I would guess.


----------



## robbins.photo (Dec 26, 2014)

KenC said:


> Why, oh why, did we start this one up again?



Because nothing says Christmas quite like a Holy War.


----------



## bribrius (Dec 26, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> KenC said:
> 
> 
> > Why, oh why, did we start this one up again?
> ...


for me at least, I got time to kill anyway. just sitting here going through photos of a puppet show my youngest kids did. They seem into the puppet thing now. Then I get to move on to going through Christmas pics. Never ends.


----------

