An ISO question

[Nikonoff]

Evening all, a quick question about ISO settings. Be it good or bad I've always left the camera set on auto ISO with the base threshold at 200 and the max at 3200. I can't say this has served me badly but there's a niggling thought that, not unlike the film days, I should manually select the ISO depending on the scenario, much like choosing a film speed and tailoring the parameters to suit. What's your thoughts and feelings on this topic?

[ameerat42]

ISO is an exposure parameter. If you change the other two, why not extend it to all three?

[Ross M]

Some photographers ideologically don't believe in using any auto facilities. I find Auto ISO handy in fast changing situations. My Nikon D750 allows me to use auto ISO in Manual mode. This allows me to select shutter speed and Aperture and shoot quickly without worrying about exposure. I try to ensure that I set the upper ISO limit to suit the situation. Also, I can remove minor noise effectively in Lightroom if high ISO results in some noise in low light.

See this article from slr lounge for a favourable perspective:

https://www.slrlounge.com/auto-iso-manual-mode-best-auto-exposure-mode (https://www.slrlounge.com/auto-iso-manual-mode-best-auto-exposure-mode/)/ (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/www.slrlounge.com/auto-iso-manual-mode-best-auto-exposure-mode/)

[fillum]

I think that if you have the auto-ISO parameters set appropriately for the shooting scenario, particularly the minimum shutter-speed (s/s), then auto-ISO is fine. It's generally advisable to keep ISO as close as possible to the camera's base value, so ISO is usually only increased when your chosen aperture and s/s require it. In my opinion if it's done manually or the camera does it automatically doesn't really matter. What you want to ensure is that your auto-ISO settings are not forcing a higher ISO than necessary in the situation. (e.g. having minimum shutter-speed setting at 1/1000 when 1/125 would be sufficient etc).

ISO was a bit different with film. ISO (or ASA as it used to be) denoted the sensitivity of a particular film stock. You would load the film you wanted to shoot and then set the camera's ISO/ASA dial to (typically) match the film. What this did was enable the camera's meter to give correct readings according to the sensitivity (ISO) of the film. Once you loaded the film the ISO setting (usually) wasn't changed for that entire roll of film. (If desired you could set the camera's ISO dial different to the film's ISO, and also change the camera's ISO dial mid-roll but reason's for doing so are beyond the scope here).



Cheers.

[Glenda]

Like Ross I use auto ISO with manual for action and birds and have found it excellent, always giving me a correct exposure and allows me to change aperture or shutter to suit the situation. For all else I usually revert to full manual, keeping the ISO as low as possible.

[arthurking83]

I'm with Phil.

Just choose Auto ISO deliberately for a specific reason.

eg. I generally shoot landscapes. Auto ISO is silly for such situations.
A few months ago, I was shooting at a wedding(for personal reasons, not paid!!), and I generally use Aperture priority mode, and used AutoISO, even tho the large room was well lit(ie. there would have been more than enough light for 99.9% of the shots fired).

So to answer the question:


.... I can't say this has served me badly but there's a niggling thought that, not unlike the film days, I should manually select the ISO depending on the scenario, much like choosing a film speed and tailoring the parameters to suit. What's your thoughts and feelings on this topic?

It all depends on the situation your shooting for ... ie. the landscapes/wedding differences above.
But that doesn't mean that you should use Auto ISO for weddings all the time. If you're using a large speedlight type flash, then you won't also require AutoISO for that situation.
For Macro shooting, you wouldn't use it if your preferred macro style was on a tripod, under lights with static subjects. But if you're chasing bugs or flowers in the wild, then AutoISO in that macro style makes sense.

On my D70s, I never used it. it was too inflexible actually, and anything above ISO400 was way too noisy anyhow!
D300 was much better. clean up to ISO3200, ISO6400 also usable if really needed, Auto ISO was much more flexible, but not perfect .. and made better with a subsequent firmware update to the camera too.
Harder to access Auto mode than it should have been, by having to delve into menus to get to it.
D800E .. almost perfect. Allows the ability to use focal length as a parameter, and allows the ability to tweak the focal length parameter based on more or less sensitivity to factor in VR too!

So for me, the use of AutoISO mode was more about the camera, than the situation.
D70s just old tech and totally inflexible feature.
D300, better, but awkward to access(speedily).
D800E, much easier to access, so now it's always in the back of my mind that it's a proper alternative as an exposure/shooting mode.

[Brian500au]

I am with Ross and LPlates on this one. If shooting wildlife I need full control over shutter speed and aperture so I set my body to manual and auto ISO (limiting the upper and lower limits). Most of the time the aperture is set to F8 because I am using extenders and I need high shutter speeds when shooting with telephoto lenses. The only variable for changing light conditions is the ISO so that is why I set it to auto. I also have a safety shift built into the body so if I do reach the upper limit then the shutter speed is the next priority adjusted.

When shooting with strobes I set everything to manual.

[jim]

If you set auto iso and manual exposure for birding, action etc, and suddenly need to shoot a landscape, one click of the front control dial should set you back on your base iso.

[Cage]

ISO is an exposure parameter. If you change the other two, why not extend it to all three?

Spot on Am. :th3:

Using Auto ISO is, to my way of thinking, surrendering a degree of control of the exposure equation to the whim of the cameras in-built processor.

[I @ M]

Using Auto ISO is, to my way of thinking, surrendering a degree of control of the exposure equation to the whim of the cameras in-built processor.

Kev, can I put an alternative view that is about 180 degrees away from yours?

Using auto is, to my way of thinking, making use of the technology which reacts faster to changing conditions than our own brains can that you have paid for when you purchased the camera.

Auto iso, semi automatic settings such as aperture / shutter priority and straight forward manual control all have their place in the scheme of things photographic, use whatever suits the purpose at hand I say. :nod:

[arthurking83]

+1 to Andrew.

If you use Aperture priority mode or shutter speed mode, what difference is it using AutoISO mode too(when the situation/conditions call for it).

Allowing the camera to automatically determine exposure is fine. Afterall, almost all cameras are programmed to determine the best exposure for that particular sensor anyhow!

The aspects of exposure I'm never too keen on is using matrix metering, or even centre weighted. I'm almost always using spot, to determine the best exposure value for the part of the scene I want exposed to my preference.

Remember that the exposure is a calculation based on the metering.
If you don't understand how to use the cameras metering features and capability, then how the final exposure eventuates is meaningless.

My guesstimate is that all, if not the overwhelming vast majority(ie. less 0.000001%) of photographers all tend to use automatic exposure of some form or another.
Too many photographers don't understand what they are doing when they switch to 'manual mode'.
They seem to think that manual mode is some sort of elevated spiritual experience to come to terms with .. but they all still use the cameras built in light meter! :confused013
Wayy too much work for zero gain.

Manual mode has it's uses, and in some situations the only way to do certain specific types of photography.
But to use manual mode and then rely on the built in meter to achieve an exposure is counter intuitive, slow, more likely to miss a shot, and wasteful as to why you've purchased the latest and greatest camera!

[swifty]

Hmm..not too sure whether to open this can of worm.
But strictly speaking ISO doesn't affect exposure and hence should be used a little differently.
It does have consequences on the resultant image so how you use your ISO setting can significantly be influenced by how your camera treats ISO.
For auto-ISO, firstly you need to see how well your camera allows you to set up the parameters to implement the auto-ISO.
But to set this up you should ideally also understand what your particular camera is doing. What's the base ISO. How does it treat intermediate ISO settings between 'full stops'. Whether it is applying analog gain or digital scaling and at what ranges. Some newer models are employing dual gain ISO implementations nowadays so when does the second gain kick in.
*edit* Also when (if) NR kicks in ie. at what ISO. Whether you can turn this off or is it baked in etc. Forgot to add this point but I think this is important for some people.
How ISO invariant your camera is. Some Sony exmor sensors are getting pretty ISO invariant so it would be conceivable we might be close to an almost ISO-less sensor and we can do away with analog amplification altogether.
How easy it is to verify you got the shot (focus, motion blur etc.) if you use an ISO invariant method.
How much post processing you want to do.

Anyways, getting back to the original question. How you set ISO manually or the limits for your auto-ISO parameters should depend on the camera itself (sensor characteristics) and the scene (how wide the scene DR is and how much of that you want to capture).
But in the end, are you a casual photographer or one that is optimizing every gram of performance out of your gear? The extra efforts might not be worth the convenience of a 'generalized' auto-ISO setting, especially for fast shooting. For controlled shooting go manual where you're in complete control.

[Nikonoff]

Hmm..not too sure whether to open this can of worms. I might have beaten you to the punch Swifty:)

:eek:WOW! Well thanks everyone for the feedback, it may take a few re-reads to grasp all that was written.

At the risk of seeming a bit dim, if the ISO value is set to auto then the camera decides on an appropriate ISO (sensor sensitivity) depending on the available light and chosen exposure selections, which means I'm relinquishing a degree of control (acknowledgements to Am), like being on shifting sands. Is that more or less the vibe?

[John King]

Harry, the more photons your sensor gets, the lower the noise and the higher the dynamic range.

To catch as many photons as possible, keep the camera's ISO as low as possible.
It is also the primary rationale behind the ETTR technique.

This applies regardless of sensor type or size.

[Glenda]

It all comes down to what you are shooting. If photographing a landscape, stars, portrait I would keep my ISO as low as possible and have my camera in full manual mode most of the time. However, if shooting sport or birds I use auto ISO. I've been shooting sports recently for an upcoming theme for a camera club comp and auto ISO is invaluable photographing people and animals moving quickly and unpredictably in a lot of cases, and in and out of shade so different light almost constantly. I still have full control of my aperture and shutter and can also add exposure compensation if required. Here is a link which explains it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFLxYMLsv8I

[arthurking83]

...
At the risk of seeming a bit dim, if the ISO value is set to auto then the camera decides on an appropriate ISO (sensor sensitivity) depending on the available light and chosen exposure selections, which means I'm relinquishing a degree of control (acknowledgements to Am)....

err. yes-ish .. and no-ish.

Yes; ISO is controlled by the camera
But No, you haven't really relinquished control to the camera.

In fact you've added another factor of control to the camera, so in essence you're still in control .. but like Andrew(I@M) said, all you're doing is making it easier on yourself in a few ways.

Lets say you use manual ISO, you set ISO to base(eg. ISO100), you require f/4 and 1/60s for an exposure in a specific situation. Clouds out and about, sun comes and goes, and storm clouds brewing.
In the sun, ISO100, f/4, and 1/60s is easy to get a good shot. You could be using aperture priority for this situation. So shutter speed will vary as the light requirements change.
The clouds come across and block the sun, now you need f/4(that's as fast as your lens allows), and shutter speed may drop to 1/30, or 1/25 or something, and you're still wanting to shoot. The things you're shooting are interesting, and you're getting involved.
Did you notice that the shutter is dropping to 1/25-1/30s? Do you understand the consequences of the shutter speed used relative to the subject, or handholding that lens. If it's a wide angle, not really an issue .. if it's a std 18-55mm kit lens, think about it more.

Now the storm clouds have rolled in, making it much darker. Shutter speed is now in the 1/8 - 1/15 range. While your lens has VR, VR is no good for keeping subjects still. You've thought about boosting ISO, but to what value?
Do you go higher than you think you really need?

Do you go manual, and just shoot at 1/60s and f/4, and risk underexposing by 3 or so stops?

While swifty is onto an interesting path with regards to ISO invariance, and the ability to pull an image back from the brink .. it's usually better to just stick with the basics and get good exposure to begin with.

If your preference is to shoot with total control, and that involves changing ISO to suit the conditions at the time, there's more of a chance that you'll miss a shot as you've probably changed after the fact.

When you look at it from that perspective, shooting in manual mode can be seen as having less control over the situation if you aren't prepared for those changing conditions.
Commanding the camera to set ISO to a value automatically to maintain good exposure is still having control over the camera!
Black images, -3Ev underexposed is not!

Auto ISO usually comes on for a pre determined shutter speed to minimise the chance of camera shake.

The only thing I would change in your original post is to not ALWAYS leave ISO to Auto. Just understand when to use it.
That is, if you're chasing young kids around the house or at a party .. AutoISO all the way.
If you're shooting landscapes/macro on a tripod, remember to turn it off.

And, if you didn't already know this, what Joh said about ETTR is true for when ISO levels start to reach into the higher end of you're cameras ability.
SO as your camera approaches that ISO3200 range, say at about ISO1600, start to think about adding a wee bit more exposure to the captured image .. usually +0.3 to +0.5 does it.
The reasoning for this at higher ISO levels is that as signal to noise ratios decrease, you want more signal(ie. image) and that's what exposure does.
Then in PP, add a little NR to the image(which will be shot in RAW mode :p) and then reduce exposure compensation a little bit to tone down the bright shadows or possibly over exposed highlights.

What's confusing here tho is that thee are multiple ways to achieve the same end result.

if you had the latest and greatest camera, that was ISO invariant up to about 5 or 6Ev from base .. jsut shoot in manual mode at whatever shutter and aperture setting and leave ISO at base. You then recover all the black detail back to a half decent looking exposure level .. and job done!

or if your camera is still the old D3100, and is ISO limited due to noise .. keep the high ISO + a little bit of over exposure in the back of your mind when shooting for when you get the images onto the computer to process.

[Ross M]

Arthurking83, yours is a seriously high quality answer. It explains the various situations and parameters that should be considered, some of which I had in mind, but perhaps didn't have the confidence to express. I'm a little jealous of your forum skills! We should all remember to provide context in our answers such as the genre of photography and type of equipment.

[Nikonoff]

Arthurking83, yours is a seriously high quality answer. It explains the various situations and parameters that should be considered, some of which I had in mind, but perhaps didn't have the confidence to express. I'm a little jealous of your forum skills! We should all remember to provide context in our answers such as the genre of photography and type of equipment.

.....and a sincere +1 from me too Ross. Arthur, you've not only satisfied my original query but provided in-context examples to enhance your explanations. Perhaps Arthur, with a nod from you, the mods could extract your explanation and make it sticky so all might benefit. Many thanks:th3:

[ivans75]

i read from somewhere i cant remember that actual professional photographer leave iso on auto. I think there is nothing wrong in leaving your iso setting on auto especially in a condition you are familiar with. I set my iso on auto sometime but i set max on 6400. The reason why we dont want auto iso is to prevent the camera choose a ridiculously high iso and blow out the picture. I find that auto iso helps me to learn about light sensitivity so when i do manual iso, i can quickly guesstimate what iso you need.

[arthurking83]

i read from somewhere i cant remember that actual professional photographer leave iso on auto. I think there is nothing wrong in leaving your iso setting on auto especially in a condition you are familiar with. ....

I'd highly recommend you don't do that!
Now I'm not a professional photographer, but I do know fact from fantasy, and leaving Auto ISO on is silly.

Use Auto ISO in specific conditions, but turn it off when it's not necessary.

eg. say your doing macro images on a tripod is half dim light, still enough light to do it, but not bright light as such.
And because your doing macro, and even tho it's on a tripod, you still want a decently high shutter speed. Not super fast, but at the least say 1/80s or 1/100s to eliminate mirror slap.
Aperture is now varied mainly to capture appropriate DOF(depth of field) but is also used as a means to vary exposure a little.

ISO now becomes the primary exposure determinant, so in this instance you definitely need to control it yourself.
Auto would probably drive you bonkers tryign to maintain a consistent exposure in the image, and if you try to use shutter speed to vary exposure, it may introduce blurring due to camera shake.

Same with most landscape situations where you're going to be ona tripod, and not so much in a rush. Aperture is basiclaly set for a specific DOF again, shutter can be varied to almost any speed, so ISO is less important, and kept as low as possible for best IQ results.

[Tannin]

Point one:

I honestly don't understand the claim that auto ISO is somehow "better" for sport and wildlife, let alone the weak excuse about "rapidly changing light conditions". Light conditions simply do not change rapidly and unpredictably enough while shooting wildlife to justify auto ISO, and although I lack experience shooting sport, I shouldn't imagine they do in that field either. If you are unable to change a basic setting like ISO rapidly enough to keep up with a cloud floating in front of the sun, just don't bother with wildlife photography, it's not for you. As for action sport work, I recommend sticking to chess.

ISO is a very important part of what you do, and it makes an irreversible difference to your pictures. Get the ISO more than a little bit wrong and it wrecks the picture. This is true enough of general photography that GET THE ISO RIGHT should be written in lipstick on your mirror, even if you have to buy some lipstick specially. With bird photography, you are very often making big crops, and GET THE ISO RIGHT isn't important, it is vital. Never mind the mirror, it should be tattooed somewhere close to your heart.

In nearly all circumstances, getting the ISO right is a human-level decision. The second-best response of a well-trained computer (such as the one in your camera) when asked to auto-set the ISO is to say "I'm sorry, I'm not as smart as a human and deciding what ISO to use is not in my pay grade". (If that's the second-best response, what is the best one? A really smart computer would say "This human is not very bright? Can't I work for somebody else?")

Can I imagine circumstances where auto ISO would be useful? Sure I can. I've probably even met such circumstances more than a few times during my decade-plus of photography with DSLRs - but I don't remember any, doubtless because the muscle memory built up by years of shooting in aperture priority dealt with the situation without any particular conscious effort. Let's face it, if pressing a button and turning a dial is too hard for you, you have worse problems to worry about than improving your photography.

But wouldn't auto ISO save some shots from being blurred by too little shutter speed? Sure it would. You will get so-so pictures spoiled by noise. A half-solution. Much better to set the ISO yourself and if you happen to set it too low, then you'll either get a clear dud (because of camera movement), or a perfect shot (because you happened to hold it pretty still and the IS system helped you out). Or, to say the same thing more simply, no chance of a perfect shot vs some chance of a perfect shot. Seems like an easy decision to me.


Point two:

Ignore all of the above and do whatever works for you.

[Gazza]

Point one:

I honestly don't understand the claim that auto ISO is somehow "better" for sport and wildlife, let alone the weak excuse about "rapidly changing light conditions". Light conditions simply do not change rapidly and unpredictably enough while shooting wildlife to justify auto ISO, and although I lack experience shooting sport, I shouldn't imagine they do in that field either. If you are unable to change a basic setting like ISO rapidly enough to keep up with a cloud floating in front of the sun, just don't bother with wildlife photography, it's not for you. As for action sport work, I recommend sticking to chess..
:rolleyes: Gosh, that reads a bit harsh...:grinning01: :grinning01:

Now, I haven't tried this auto/manual thingy yet (keen to), but what about that troublesome 'really need a pic of' bird that flys from a nicely lit perch into the middle of a tree?...or that player out in the center of the field running into the shadow of the grandstand? I assume you need to expose for your subject, not just a quick snap shot...

I don't think it's just slow moving clouds that we need this quick action for, is it? (going to find that chess board now...:grinning01:)

[jim]

With your camera in manual and with auto iso, it will set the appropriate iso for your choice of aperture and shutter. To be honest those are the values I want to be choosing for myself so I'm happy to relinquish control of the iso to the camera, provided only that I set a reasonable maximum iso. The only difficulty I see is that you can't see the iso in the viewfinder, so you might not realise that you are reaching the extremes of your chosen range. Or even exceeding them sometimes.

[Hamster]

I agree with you @arthurking83, especially
"Too many photographers don't understand what they are doing when they switch to 'manual mode'.
They seem to think that manual mode is some sort of elevated spiritual experience to come to terms with .. but they all still use the cameras built in light meter! :confused013
Wayy too much work for zero gain."
Tannin, following kids around in changing light is one example where manually changing ISO will not work. I am pinned to f4 with a 70-200 to get the DOF I want and need a minimum speed. I don't have time to look at the meter and flick up the ISO as my boy runs through a patch of shade, or for that matter during many other decisive and fleeting moments

One thing I see people saying is what @mdj101711 said, I.e. the reason we don't want auto ISO is to prevent the camera choosing a ridiculously high ISO and blowing out the picture.
The camera will choose the lowest ISO within a pre selected range to CORRECTLY EXPOSE the image. Why would it blow it out? That's like saying, I don't like auto gearboxes because I want to prevent the car selecting a ridiculously low gear and blowing my engine. And like an F1 driver has a semi auto box to allow the gear change to occur quickly at the decisive moment, I choose a semi auto setting on the camera so I can press the shutter at the decisive moment. (Ok, I may have gone too far with the analogies now [emoji3])

[Hamster]

you might not realise that you are reaching the extremes of your chosen range. Or even exceeding them sometimes.

Set a range in the menu that you are happy with. The camera won't exceed this range. Job done.

[Hamster]

Oh, one thing I was going to say @arthurking83 is spot metering your subject may ensure it is correctly exposed, but how do you deal with other parts of the image that may then be over or under exposed? Surely a matrix approach is good to avoid blown highlights and still give you the latitude to adjust subject exposure to where you want it in pp. Sorry if I'm being to specific for your comment and that's not what you meant.
Personally, I use the rgb histogram to ensure the scene is captured within the limits of the dynamic range of the camera. But I start with a general metering measure unless I have to spot meter for a specific situation. Maybe we're talking different types of photography, I'm thinking more landscape.

[Gazza]

...The only difficulty I see is that you can't see the iso in the viewfinder...
Ya need a Canon....:grinning01: :rolleyes:

[jim]

It would be jolly useful Gazza. All I can do is rotate the command dials until the exposure compensation thingie appears. When that happpens then either iso 64 is too high (!) or 3200 (which I usually set as the maximum) is too low. So that gives you some idea where you are. It all seems to work out ok in practice.

- - - Updated - - -


Set a range in the menu that you are happy with. The camera won't exceed this range. Job done.

Hamster if the parameters you set are insufficient for correct exposure, a Nikon camera will just take an underexposed or overexposed image. That's what I mean by exceeding your range.

[arthurking83]

.... The only difficulty I see is that you can't see the iso in the viewfinder, so you might not realise that you are reaching the extremes of your chosen range. Or even exceeding them sometimes.

Like Gazza said, this is camera dependent.
Nikon cameras like D300 type pro/semi pro models all have ISO value in the vf LCD.
Some models also tell you if you have set ISO to auto too, so instead of just indicating ISO, they light up ISO Auto(where the auto is listed under the ISO indicator).
Not sure what vf info the semi pro models like D7200 gives tho.


Oh, one thing I was going to say @arthurking83 is spot metering your subject may ensure it is correctly exposed, but how do you deal with other parts of the image that may then be over or under exposed? ...

I think it depends on how you like to shoot.
I've found matrix too hit and miss, so just stopped using it.
Even for landscapes, I do manual matrix metering in that I'll set the spot point over on the highlight, or shadow I want captured as well, then back onto the subject I'm more interested in for the exposure.
For highlights, I'll add a filter where practical, otherwise just expose a little darker on the subject(where practical) knowing that I can regain exposure latitude back in PP on both exposure points.

Of course there are times when you're simply going to blow highlights or lose shadow detail no matter what .. the metering type used makes no difference, that's just a dynamic range issue for that sensor.

I think my main gripe with matrix is that neither the metering system, nor the camera's other features really understands that a white subject is white, grey, black or pink!
And I don't trust them to predict what it is that it sees.

eg. if you just meter on a white cloud with zero compensation(ie. neutral) the exposure the camera will output will be that ubiquitous 18% grey value that it's calibrated to do so.
But I don't want grey clouds, I want white ones, so I always meter on a cloud, pop exposure compensation +ively up to about +0.7 or +1.0 Ev, which then meters that part of the subject matter as white instead of grey.
Take a shutter speed reading and then balance the use of filter, and exposure latitude as best as I can for the scene.

Sometimes there are parts of a scene that simply are impossible to capture correctly. eg. the sun. if you try to capture a scene with the sun in it, and any shadowy areas as well, and those dark areas are important, then the sun blowing out really doesn't matter much.
It's the sun, and my choice is to always allow it to blow out(usually).
I know my methods are slow, and it is done deliberately so.

[jim]

Erm, yes I'm an idiot* my viewfinder does display the iso, whether in auto or manual mode. How did I not notice that?


*Try to act a little surprised by this revelation.

[Gazza]

Erm, yes I'm an idiot* my viewfinder does display the iso, whether in auto or manual mode. How did I not notice that?


*Try to act a little surprised by this revelation.
Still, I think ya need a Canon....:D (I was surprised)

[Hamster]

Hamster if the parameters you set are insufficient for correct exposure, a Nikon camera will just take an underexposed or overexposed image. That's what I mean by exceeding your range.

Ah ok, gotcha. Canon is the same, so one has to keep an eye on things to make sure that one isn't asking the impossible.

[Hamster]

I think it depends on how you like to shoot.
I've found matrix too hit and miss, so just stopped using it.
Even for landscapes, I do manual matrix metering in that I'll set the spot point over on the highlight, or shadow I want captured as well, then back onto the subject I'm more interested in for the exposure.
For highlights, I'll add a filter where practical, otherwise just expose a little darker on the subject(where practical) knowing that I can regain exposure latitude back in PP on both exposure points.

Of course there are times when you're simply going to blow highlights or lose shadow detail no matter what .. the metering type used makes no difference, that's just a dynamic range issue for that sensor.

I think my main gripe with matrix is that neither the metering system, nor the camera's other features really understands that a white subject is white, grey, black or pink!
And I don't trust them to predict what it is that it sees.

eg. if you just meter on a white cloud with zero compensation(ie. neutral) the exposure the camera will output will be that ubiquitous 18% grey value that it's calibrated to do so.
But I don't want grey clouds, I want white ones, so I always meter on a cloud, pop exposure compensation +ively up to about +0.7 or +1.0 Ev, which then meters that part of the subject matter as white instead of grey.
Take a shutter speed reading and then balance the use of filter, and exposure latitude as best as I can for the scene.

Sometimes there are parts of a scene that simply are impossible to capture correctly. eg. the sun. if you try to capture a scene with the sun in it, and any shadowy areas as well, and those dark areas are important, then the sun blowing out really doesn't matter much.
It's the sun, and my choice is to always allow it to blow out(usually).
I know my methods are slow, and it is done deliberately so.

Sounds good, and like you say, is a different means to the same end.
I use evaluative for the scene, knowing that it might blow out the white clouds or white surf on the waves. I then check the histogram to see if there are any blown highlights and use exposure compensation to bring those down. If I'm doing aerials I may just put -1ev compensation without checking the histogram as that is usually about right.

[John King]

deleted.

[Tannin]

Hamster if the parameters you set are insufficient for correct exposure, a Nikon camera will just take an underexposed or overexposed image. That's what I mean by exceeding your range.


Ah ok, gotcha. Canon is the same, so one has to keep an eye on things to make sure that one isn't asking the impossible.

Not sure how this applies to auto-ISO (never used it in my life) but Canon cameras have a function called Safety Shift, which you can turn on or off as you please. If switched on, it automatically compensates for out-of-range exposures by adjusting a different parameter. (You can choose which one.) For example, in Av mode at f/4, if the metered exposures requires more than 1/8000th, the camera will use f/5.6 instead. Or it can adjust the ISO. It's similar in Tv mode.

[jim]

Don’t think Nikons have that. But what would I know? I couldn’t even see the iso displayed in the viewfinder.

- - - Updated - - -

Don’t think Nikons have that. But what would I know? I couldn’t even see the iso displayed in the viewfinder.

[Tannin]

Try closing one eye.

Try closing one eye.

:)

[tandeejay]

I've been doing a bit of photography at church where there is stage lighting, and I initially started out using Aperture priority mode with Auto ISO, but I have recently changed to using manual with manual ISO, and found I'm getting much better and more consistent results. I was finding the high dynamic range between the people on the stage lit with lights and the background was just confusing the camera, and it was more often than not over-exposing.

I'm with AK on this - it depends on the situation :)

[jim]

Id have thought that since iso is a fairly predictable parameter (by which I mean that you'll pretty much always want it as low as possible, not counting Lo-1 or whatever rubbish settings) it would make sense to let the camera set it, while you pick the aperture and shutter speeds that suit the photo you want to take. So leave it in manual with auto iso, and if the camera is metering wrong set some exposure compensation, which will result in the camera varying the iso accordingly.

And there you go! General all-purpose settings for all occasions!

[ameerat42]

...which will result in the camera varying the iso accordingly.

And there you go! General all-purpose settings for all occasions!


Or, in short, "GAPS for all..." - Just don't fall through the gaps:eek:

This could be another Jim's franchise:p

[tandeejay]

Id have thought that since ISO is a fairly predictable parameter (by which I mean that you'll pretty much always want it as low as possible, not counting Lo-1 or whatever rubbish settings) it would make sense to let the camera set it, while you pick the aperture and shutter speeds that suit the photo you want to take. So leave it in manual with auto ISO, and if the camera is metering wrong set some exposure compensation, which will result in the camera varying the ISO accordingly.

That is exactly what I was doing, but still the camera was struggling with the extreme difference between people in the stage lights and the dark background, varying the ISO way more than it needed. going full manual in my situation has greatly improved the quality of my photos. on average, I shoot at ISO 800, 1/125, 2.8, although at our recent Christmas production, we hired in additional lights, and I found I could drop my ISO to 400, increase shutter speed to 1/160, and even narrow the aperture to 4.

But this is a very specific situation. Under stage lights, I have found there is not much need to vary the exposure settings, but the camera kept changing its mind on what settings were required, and I needed to be very specific where I set the spot meter on. with full manual, I can set everything to what is required, and just concentrate on getting the focus right. No need to try and make a decision every shot about the exposure... once you have the settings right, just shoot away ;)


Mostly I do use auto ISO and aperture mode.

[arthurking83]

I've been doing a bit of photography at church where there is stage lighting, and I initially started out using Aperture priority mode with Auto ISO, but I have recently changed to using manual with manual ISO, and found I'm getting much better and more consistent results. I was finding the high dynamic range between the people on the stage lit with lights and the background was just confusing the camera, and it was more often than not over-exposing.

....

Kind'a sorta makes sense to go manual in a situation like the church/stage one, as you'd expect the lighting to be consistent.
Had it been a rock concert with the possibility that the lighting would vary considerably from moment to moment(eg. imagine a Iron Maiden concert with lights blaring bright in unison with the music), then going full manual probably would have been an exercise in frustration.
Except if you knew the song/lighting routine and planned to shoot only at particular moments during the act.


That is exactly what I was doing, but still the camera was struggling with the extreme difference between people in the stage lights and the dark background, varying the ISO way more than it needed. going full manual in my situation has greatly improved the quality of my photos. ....

Have to ask the obvious question: what metering mode did you use in this situation?

I almost exclusively use spot metering. Probably 99.99% of the time.
Very rarely do I use matrix, and even more rarely centre weighted.

But in the above situation, I'd have switched from spot to matrix.
In fact, I'd probably have tested matrix and centre weighted to see how each would work for me.
I have very limited experience with non spot metering modes.

** just checked my archives **
Because my memory is lacking nowadays, I had to go back to view some images I have to remember what type of settings I've used over the years.
about 7 years ago kids had a school concert in a hall of some type, and the background was predominantly a black curtain, but also changed for each act(eg. to a bright rainbow on a blue background prop, and so on).
Those images I shot were all matrix, manual mode, and with varying degrees of exposure compensation.
I guess the reasoning was that the background wasn't really going to change during each act. So my reference point for exposure was going to be the background, whether the black curtain(with -1 Ev compensation) or the rainbow scene(-0.3 to 0 Ev).

If you used spot mode, then almost certainly the issue was something like the spot point being cast onto the dark background(I'm guessing black curtains, as per usual), and the camera trying to expose the black curtain as a mid grey tone if you don't dial in -ve exposure compensation to suit.
And (assuming) if the subjects were all wearing different coloured clothing(eg. some in all white and other in all black) then you'd have exposure variance in dealing with that too.

The issue with reliance on exposure compensation is the 'fumbling around' nature it entails.
On a D5500 type body with only the one control dial, you have to take your finger off the shutter release, and effect a two button combo to set any exposure compensation.
If you're predominantly concerned with composition, focus and tracking a particular subject, then dealing with exposure compensation could be more of a hindrance than being helpful(ie. a higher possibility of missing a shot).
But with the twin control type cameras(ie. D7xxx, D300 and up type bodies... as long as it has the twin dials!) you set quick compensation in the menu, and exposure compensation is a matter of turning the appropriate dial .. while you're still shooting.

So I'd say(if you ever do that kind of thing again) try matrix metering, manual mode, autoISO, and get a decent rendering of the background as a reference point.
The autoISO isn't important unless you're reframing the shot in a massively different manner. ie. going from a wide, general viewpoint to a zoomed in portrait framing of a specific character.

In the camera setup above(assuming a static background), the autoISO won't vary so wildly as the matrix 'sees' the background as the primary exposure reference .. it may vary but a couple of thirds or so(depending on camera settings used).
But, if you do decide to zoom in to a portrait scene, and you have -ve exposure compensation set, for the portrait shot, you have to adjust the compensation(obviously).

In AutoISO mode that's it .. worry only about the reframed shot now.
But in manual ISO mode, you also have to worry about what ISO setting may be needed too(because you're in manual mode).

Aperture Priority mode may not be suitable, depending on shutter speed requirements and lenses used .. and camera used too! But it may have been.
7 years back I had the D300, and it's AutoISO is nowhere near as useful as todays Nikon's autoISO modes, which allow to cater for minimum shutter speeds depending on focal length and stuff like that! ;)

[tandeejay]

Yes, I was using spot metering. I should try Center weight and matrix. Not only is it the clothing colour, but we do have some Africans on the stage, so also skin colour with both white European and black African...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tandeejay]

Now that I'm on a real computer, I can respond in full to your comment :) (very hard to give indepth responses the attention they deserve when using Tapatalk on my phone)




Kind'a sorta makes sense to go manual in a situation like the church/stage one, as you'd expect the lighting to be consistent.
Had it been a rock concert with the possibility that the lighting would vary considerably from moment to moment(eg. imagine a Iron Maiden concert with lights blaring bright in unison with the music), then going full manual probably would have been an exercise in frustration.
Except if you knew the song/lighting routine and planned to shoot only at particular moments during the act.


Lighting was definitely consistent... (apart from the lighting guy liking to use blue and/or magenta wash at times... makes for extreme difficulty getting the white balance right... white light from the front, and then a mix of blue and magenta from the back...)

one button and dial rotation to change the iso if needed, or no button with the dial to change the shutter speed... (I just got to remember, left button for ISO, right button for Aperture :D )





Have to ask the obvious question: what metering mode did you use in this situation?


As answered above, I was using spot metering.




So I'd say(if you ever do that kind of thing again) try matrix metering, manual mode, autoISO, and get a decent rendering of the background as a reference point.
The autoISO isn't important unless you're reframing the shot in a massively different manner. ie. going from a wide, general viewpoint to a zoomed in portrait framing of a specific character.


I will experiment with centre weight and matrix metering modes next time, however, I'm quite happy with the results now I'm using manual everything, but will be interesting to see. An increase in keepers would be a positive result :)



In the camera setup above(assuming a static background), the autoISO won't vary so wildly as the matrix 'sees' the background as the primary exposure reference .. it may vary but a couple of thirds or so(depending on camera settings used).
But, if you do decide to zoom in to a portrait scene, and you have -ve exposure compensation set, for the portrait shot, you have to adjust the compensation(obviously).

In AutoISO mode that's it .. worry only about the reframed shot now.
But in manual ISO mode, you also have to worry about what ISO setting may be needed too(because you're in manual mode).

Aperture Priority mode may not be suitable, depending on shutter speed requirements and lenses used .. and camera used too! But it may have been.
7 years back I had the D300, and it's AutoISO is nowhere near as useful as todays Nikon's autoISO modes, which allow to cater for minimum shutter speeds depending on focal length and stuff like that! ;)

Mostly using my Sigma 105mm (due to it's f2.8 max aperture) so no zooming for me, except with my feet :( a 70-200mm f2.8 would give me more options, but one of those is (quite) a little way off yet... unless someone donates me one :D ...

[arthurking83]

With white balance, always try to look for something white(eg. clothing) in a scene as the first port of call, otherwise estimate something grey(even a silvery/chrome thing could work) and as a third option you can use black(thick heavy background curtains).

Of course if they add a heavy blue tint, then the white grey or black subject will also have a strong blue cast too.

The via your raw converter, should have an option to either set a whitebalance dropper point on one image but in a batch over the entire selection of images(ViewNX2 does this pretty well and easily)
What I do is test the dropper tool on one image, and make small adjustments to the location of the dropper over the point selection, and use a broader sized dropper(ie. an area rather than a point).
The main reason it may not come out looking balanced could(most likely) be due to noise in the image. Moving the dropper around the area of interest changes the effect .. I've yet to not get a good WB rendering using this tool.

I reckon you'll get more success with Matrix than with Centre weighted.

And if you do go 70-200 for such a situation again .. make sure it's a stabilised model.

And also take into consideration that D7100 and D7200's will now be quite reasonably priced now with their(actual or technical) discontinuation. You may find new 'run out' models cheaply, or even a S/H.
Reason I bring this up as an option is simply for the twin dial and hence quick compensation ability they offer.

eg. if in Aperture priority mode, with quick compensation on, you turn the shutter dial and it's job then is to set exposure compensation. I use this literally .. all the time.

So, in a sense, your Aperture priority mode becomes a psuedo manual mode but with auto exposure ability.
In Auto ISO mode, it doesn't really affect shutter speed until ISO has 'bottomed out' or topped out.

[tandeejay]

Yep. I do all that... the problem is when the people at the front of the stage are illuminated by the white lights, and the people at the back of the stage illuminated with blue light... or worse, blue light from the left and magenta light from the right... that white point dropper only works for the people at the front, and there have been some colours, that even the white point dropper can't push the values far enough with the temp slider hard right over at 50000K, and the tint slider hard left at -150... the magenta lights I've found I can correct using the HSL sliders in light room, the blue tint I am still working on eliminating without turning the skin grey. The issue is that different parts of the image have different white points. Someone has "thoughtfully" put white stickers on the microphones which I find mostly work with the WB dropper :)

[arthurking83]

Ah! I get 'ya now..

mixed lighting .. hate the stuff!

I remember once I was in Brighton at night, and taking shots of the beach houses down there.
They had fluoro lights and sodium lights for the area and made the images look totally carp!

WB was no help at all.
Had to learn(for the first time) how to use the colour sliders(in CaptureNX2) as opposed to the normal point and click style of local editing.

So I mean this in a nice way, but .... better you, than me having to deal with it :p

[tandeejay]

Sometimes, conversion to B&W is the only way to save a photo with mixed WB...

Haven't used CaptureNX2 for a while (since getting into LightRoom)... might have a play with the colour sliders in there to see if I can do any better than the colour sliders in LR... :scrtch: