I am puzzled.. (Page 2): I guess I too am puzzled ! :sm16:...

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

imagemeister wrote:

Wow, I never thought anyone would do this ! INCREDIBLE

I guess I too am puzzled !

george19

I remember when shooting film how cool it would be to change ISO in the middle of a roll. Cool how digital lets you do that.

I think you are correct... set aperture and shutter speed to suit the conditions of your shot. Sports? Fast shutter. Macro? Suitable depth of field. Long lens? Fast shutter again.

When you have exhausted all rational possibilities, change ISO, use flash or other external lighting, or use neutral density filter.

Start playing from there.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

imagemeister wrote:

Wow, I never thought anyone would do this ! INCREDIBLE

I let these little tips slip out gradually so as not to get you folks too worked up.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Given that the area in which digital cameras are most clearly superior to film is in low light IQ, I find it surprising that photographers would resist using an ISO higher than base. If it is necessary to get the aperture and shutter speed I feel I need to use, I don't even think twice about going to 400 or even 800. And I know that even higher ISOs will be better than getting unsharp shots.

duck72 Loc: Laurel Ridge, PA

jerryc41 wrote:

If the subject is an adult human, he might suggest settings, but I prefer to make my own choices. Like you, I leave ISO at the base setting. Then I decide about aperture or shutter.

Subtle enough and effective

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

If u never take it off of base ISO wouldnt you get a lot of dark pix? or maybe I just didnt understand what you were saying.

cthahn

Nothing wrong with that.

wcmoorejr Loc: Birmingham Alabama

Rongnongno,

It all depends on where you shoot. I shoot a lot of dog sports. it is almost always inside and flashes are never allowed because it interferes with the dogs. To stop the dog's motion you have to use 1/320 to 1/500. I usually use f3.2 - f3.5. My ISO ends up between 3200 to 8000 depending on the lights. My 7dmkii gives pretty good images. you wont print a mural with it but I have done 8x10 and the clients were very happy.

Regards,
Willie

Rongnongno wrote:

Many time I see question over aperture or speed settings.

My puzzling is simple: Is not the subject determining the settings instead of the 'optimal' exposure settings?

I personally set the aperture to obtain the subject dof I need and the speed for effect - if needed -. I rarely vary from the base ISO.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

cthahn wrote:

Nothing wrong with that.

Nothing wrong with WHAT???????????????????

duck72 Loc: Laurel Ridge, PA

You truly enjoy "stirring the poop."
"A regular here" looking for... entertainment?
*Lots* of camera settings for lots of purposes.
Your point is...?

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

It would be beneficial,at least to some,if you folks would use the "Quote Reply" method when posting. Thanks much.

duck72 Loc: Laurel Ridge, PA

I (my post only) was "Replying" to the OP's post- not "Quote Replying."
Is that "OK" in UHH etiquette for us other folks who try to make things clear?

DaveO wrote:

It would be beneficial,at least to some,if you folks would use the "Quote Reply" method when posting. Thanks much.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Rongnongno wrote:

Many time I see question over aperture or speed settings.

My puzzling is simple: Is not the subject determining the settings instead of the 'optimal' exposure settings?

I personally set the aperture to obtain the subject dof I need and the speed for effect - if needed -. I rarely vary from the base ISO.

You have at your disposal three tools, aperture, shutter speed and ISO. If you choose to use only two of these, you are limiting yourself. Fine if that works for the range of your photography. It would not work for me.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

duck72 wrote:

I (my post only) was "Replying" to the OP's post- not "Quote Replying."
Is that "OK" in UHH etiquette for us other folks who try to make things clear?

Quite frequently other posts may appear in between your post and the one being replied to. I'm not singling anyone out,just a simple request. I am guilty of doing it as well. Quoting the OP is not difficult either in order to eliminate confusion.

duck72 Loc: Laurel Ridge, PA

Quite frequently. Guilty also. Still haven't seen a response to my "ill-posted" reply to OP.

DaveO wrote:

Quite frequently other posts may appear in between your post and the one being replied to. I'm not singling anyone out,just a simple request. I am guilty of doing it as well. Quoting the OP is not difficult either in order to eliminate confusion.