User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  2
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Even or Odd ISO value?

  1. #1
    Ausphotography Regular wideangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Sep 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    1,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Even or Odd ISO value?

    When you need a higher ISO value, do you ever use increments other than 100,200,400,800 etc or do you also use 125,160,320,640 etc?
    please ask before PP my images

    "Life is what happens to you while your busy making other plans"

  2. #2
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,633
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Personally just the majors... 100 200 400 800 etc

    http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...anation_of_ISO
    regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
    Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff



  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i use both
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  4. #4
    keen learner of new tricks.
    Join Date
    09 Feb 2009
    Location
    Newcastle, NSW
    Posts
    8,372
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    there is a thread here somewhere (I think it was on AP anyway) that talked about positive (I think this is the terminology/word) ISO`s etc. Like.....if you selected ISO 200, the camera ran as normal....but if you went ISO 160 for example, the camera leaned a bit heavier on sharpening at the expense of dynamic range and if you went ISO 240 instead, the camera selected a slightly wider dynamic range at the expense of losing a little sharpening. It is the same for ISO 400, 800 and so on etc. I think I have this right. have a look on Google as it may have been there that I read about it. Maybe someone else can explain it more than me.
    Graeme
    "May the good Lord look down and smile upon your face"......Norman Gunston___________________________________________________
    Nikon: D7000, D80, 12-24 f4, 17-55 f2.8, 18-135, 70-300VR, 35f2, SB 400, SB 600, TC-201 2x converter. Tamron: 90 macro 2.8 Kenko ext. tubes. Photoshop CS2.


  5. #5
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,633
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    errr ... check the link in my post above

  6. #6
    Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter
    wideangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Sep 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    1,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for the link Kym, it's interesting though as I find that there are wide ranging debates on this issue, some saying that whole ISOs are better, whilst other say that others are more effective.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Kym's link doesnt really shed a more in-depth look into the ISO number debate, its just a basic guide into ISO really.

    I know for videographers with DSLRs, they are proponents of the use of ISO 160, 320 and so on instead of the normal base or whole numbers. I havent looked into why yet though.

  8. #8
    In Training MarkChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Jan 2008
    Location
    Widgee, Queensland
    Posts
    2,228
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For me, I use the full stop increment for ISO, the "in-between" numbers are only 1 third of a stop, which I can then acount for by way of the other exposure options available to me
    Smoke Alarms Save Lives, Install One Today
    I shoot Canon
    Cheers, Mark


  9. #9
    Ausphotography Regular swifty's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 May 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,352
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JM Tran View Post
    Kym's link doesnt really shed a more in-depth look into the ISO number debate, its just a basic guide into ISO really.

    I know for videographers with DSLRs, they are proponents of the use of ISO 160, 320 and so on instead of the normal base or whole numbers. I havent looked into why yet though.
    Could be something to do with the GH2 or is it the same with other commonly used cameras for videography eg. 5D2??.
    When I was playing with the GH2 for a couple of weeks and doing some research, if memory serves me right 160, 320, 640 etc. were the preferred increments. Can't quite remember what the reasoning was though. I think the base ISO on a GH2 was ISO 160 hence 'nice' multiple increments produced less artifacts possibly.
    On my Fuji and Nikons I tend to also go with nice multiples of the base ie. 100, 200, 400 etc.
    Nikon FX

  10. #10
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,633
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by swifty View Post
    Could be something to do with the GH2 or is it the same with other commonly used cameras for videography eg. 5D2??.
    When I was playing with the GH2 for a couple of weeks and doing some research, if memory serves me right 160, 320, 640 etc. were the preferred increments. Can't quite remember what the reasoning was though. I think the base ISO on a GH2 was ISO 160 hence 'nice' multiple increments produced less artifacts possibly.
    On my Fuji and Nikons I tend to also go with nice multiples of the base ie. 100, 200, 400 etc.
    That is my understanding, i.e. use power of 2 multiples of the base ISO.
    And a Mark said, you can easily get 1.3 stops from either aperture or shutter speed.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by swifty View Post
    Could be something to do with the GH2 or is it the same with other commonly used cameras for videography eg. 5D2??.
    When I was playing with the GH2 for a couple of weeks and doing some research, if memory serves me right 160, 320, 640 etc. were the preferred increments. Can't quite remember what the reasoning was though. I think the base ISO on a GH2 was ISO 160 hence 'nice' multiple increments produced less artifacts possibly.
    On my Fuji and Nikons I tend to also go with nice multiples of the base ie. 100, 200, 400 etc.

    Same for the 5D2 according to video forums Dave, I need to find out why if I plan to shoot a lot of videos soon!

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Oct 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    76
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just recently I discovered that I can change the stepping in both my bodies... I promptly changed the ISO value to whole stops as the third-stop thing drove me nuts. I already have the ability to do that with the shutter speed and aperture. I try to stick to the native ISO as much as I possibly can anyway.

  13. #13
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,864
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by darrenmars View Post
    Just recently I discovered that I can change the stepping in both my bodies... I promptly changed the ISO value to whole stops as the third-stop thing drove me nuts. I already have the ability to do that with the shutter speed and aperture. I try to stick to the native ISO as much as I possibly can anyway.
    Darren, one very handy benefit of using 1/3 stops in ISO is to set a desired shutter speed and aperture and then set ISO to auto ( within a specified range ) to allow the camera to meter as closely as possible when photographing subjects like birds who are prone to move quickly between open sunny spaces and shaded branches etc.
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Oct 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    76
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'll be sure to keep that in mind in the future, but generally I don't need to do that. Great tip tho!

  15. #15
    Perpetually Bewildered fillum's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Sep 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,119
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If setting manually I generally use either 200 (base) or 800. Occasionally I might use 1600 but generally when it that range I'll use auto-ISO like Andrew mentioned to try to keep the ISO at the minimum needed to maintain a set s/s.

    Incidentally my D300 (and I assume other Nikons ?) will use the 1/3 and 1/2 stop ISO settings when in auto-ISO mode regardless of what the ISO increment step is set at.


    Cheers.
    Phil.

    Some Nikon stuff. I shoot Mirrorless and Mirrorlessless.


  16. #16
    The Only Easy Day Was Yesterday
    Join Date
    27 Mar 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    549
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There is a great article here that explains the misconceptions about native (i.e. 100's) and pushed/pulled iso's.

    http://shootintheshot.joshsilfen.com...lr-native-iso/

    Cheers
    John


    EOS 1D MKIII x2, EOS 6D; Samyang 14 2.8 IF ED UMC, EF 17-40 4 L, EF 24-70 2.8 L, EF 50 1.4, EF 85 1.8, EF 70-200 2.8 L IS, EF 100 2.8 macro, EF 400 5.6 L, 1.4x II TC, EF25 ET; Speelite 580EX, 430EX; Nissin Di866II; Yongnuo YN560i/ii & YN460ii, YN622C's, RF602's; Gitzo GT3541XLS + Markins Q20i; Manfrotto 055XProB + Giottos MH1301; Manfrotto 680B c/w Kirk MPA-1; Tamrac Pro5, ThinkTank Airport Accelerator, Airport Antidote V2, Pro Speed Belt + Racing Harness + Modular Skin Set; Lightroom 5.3, Photoshop CS5.
    myflickr

    Scarlet letters aren't that bad.. I rather like L



Posting Permissions

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