5 Camera Setting Mistakes New Photographers Make
Apr 2, 2018 17:47:47 #
Can someone explain why/how an ISO of 400 gives sharper images than 100? That is counter intuitive to me. Since I am stuck in some sort of time warp between 60 years of film photography and shot very low ASA film when I wanted the sharpest, least grainy, and pushed Tri-X to 1200 when I wanted the graininess , this comment blows my mind.
Apr 2, 2018 17:55:11 #
toxdoc42 wrote:
Can someone explain why/how an ISO of 400 gives sharper images than 100? That is counter intuitive to me. Since I am stuck in some sort of time warp between 60 years of film photography and shot very low ASA film when I wanted the sharpest, least grainy, and pushed Tri-X to 1200 when I wanted the graininess , this comment blows my mind.
Because ISO 400 can give higher shutter speeds which eliminate subject or camera motion, or smaller apertures for more depth of field. If you have plenty of light or are using a tripod, ISO 100 will have better IQ.
Apr 2, 2018 17:59:16 #
toxdoc42 wrote:
Can someone explain why/how an ISO of 400 gives sharper images than 100? That is counter intuitive to me. Since I am stuck in some sort of time warp between 60 years of film photography and shot very low ASA film when I wanted the sharpest, least grainy, and pushed Tri-X to 1200 when I wanted the graininess , this comment blows my mind.
Do you understand the value of moving the shutter speed from 1/60 to 1/250, while leaving aperture the same?
added: in the days of film, I normally shot Kodachrome 25, but when I knew our daughters were going to be in a Christmas program, I would switch to something like Kodacolor 1000, or even Fujifilm 1600, and a shot that would be something like f/5.6, 1/10 became a much more feasible f/5.6, 1/250, and "good bye motion blur" {grain has always been much less of an enemy of sharpness than 'motion blur' is}
Apr 2, 2018 18:55:41 #
toxdoc42 wrote:
Can someone explain why/how an ISO of 400 gives sharper images than 100? That is counter intuitive to me. Since I am stuck in some sort of time warp between 60 years of film photography and shot very low ASA film when I wanted the sharpest, least grainy, and pushed Tri-X to 1200 when I wanted the graininess , this comment blows my mind.
That's because it's a little bit incorrect.
Assuming your comment is strictly about sensor IQ...
The D4s is actual best at ISO 200, not 400. Due to the way the signal is handled, it's a rare exception where base ISO isn't the best ISO. In just about every other camera, base ISO will give you the best IQ off the sensor since there really isn't any analog or digital amplification applied in-camera to raise brightness via ISO.
Apr 2, 2018 18:59:43 #
Fotoartist wrote:
An article in "Picture Correct", the Aut... (show quote)
I would only quibble with #4. Shooting wide open, or nearly so, allows you to isolate the subject from the background, which is one of the reasons pros buy fast lenses. At a recent seminar by our local paper, which employs 9 pro photographers, one of the key points made by almost every presenter (portraits, photojournalism, sports, weddings...) was to shoot wide open or a stop down to isolate the subject.
Apr 2, 2018 19:01:58 #
Steve Perry wrote:
That's because it's a little bit incorrect.
Assuming your comment is strictly about sensor IQ...
The D4s is actual best at ISO 200, not 400. Due to the way the signal is handled, it's a rare exception where base ISO isn't the best ISO. In just about every other camera, base ISO will give you the best IQ off the sensor since there really isn't any analog or digital amplification applied in-camera to raise brightness via ISO.
Assuming your comment is strictly about sensor IQ...
The D4s is actual best at ISO 200, not 400. Due to the way the signal is handled, it's a rare exception where base ISO isn't the best ISO. In just about every other camera, base ISO will give you the best IQ off the sensor since there really isn't any analog or digital amplification applied in-camera to raise brightness via ISO.
But in the real world, a lot more goes into overall image IQ than sensor IQ. It isn't a rare exception that a higher ISO might give you a higher shutter speed which will give you a sharper photo.
Apr 2, 2018 19:04:09 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
But in the real world, a lot more goes into overall image IQ than sensor IQ. It isn't a rare exception that a higher ISO might give you a higher shutter speed which will give you a sharper photo.
I agree - but I believe the question was strictly addressing sensor IQ since he was referring to fine grain vs high ASA films. That's why I made sure in the post that I was talking strictly about sensor IQ only.
Apr 2, 2018 19:19:16 #
Steve Perry wrote:
I agree - but I believe the question was strictly addressing sensor IQ since he was referring to fine grain vs high ASA films. That's why I made sure in the post that I was talking strictly about sensor IQ only.
Maybe he was, but it doesn't occur to some people that a higher ISO can result in sharper photos by stopping motion or giving more DOF.
Apr 2, 2018 19:20:17 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
Maybe he was, but it doesn't occur to some people that a higher ISO can result in sharper photos by stopping motion or giving more DOF.
Again, I do agree :)
Apr 2, 2018 19:38:03 #
About #4 too. While I never shoot wide open but isn't shooting wide open an f/1.2 lens is the sole reason to buy such a lens these days? If low light is the reason then the very high ISO available would be more than compensate for that.
Apr 2, 2018 20:12:19 #
BebuLamar wrote:
About #4 too. While I never shoot wide open but isn't shooting wide open an f/1.2 lens is the sole reason to buy such a lens these days? If low light is the reason then the very high ISO available would be more than compensate for that.
Fast lenses also give a brighter view and more accurate autofocus. And shooting fast action in low light might require a fast lens wide open as well as good high ISO performance.
Apr 2, 2018 23:57:29 #
How about shooting in automatic where the camera chooses the exposure triangle? It's hard to imagine what anyone could learn from it.
Apr 3, 2018 00:44:30 #
papa wrote:
How about shooting in automatic where the camera chooses the exposure triangle? It's hard to imagine what anyone could learn from it.
There are times I do use automatic mode such as when conditions are changing so fast that I don't want to try to keep up with them. And actually, the camera can make good choices. But this is the exception to how I usually do it.
Apr 3, 2018 05:32:49 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
Fast lenses also give a brighter view and more accurate autofocus. And shooting fast action in low light might require a fast lens wide open as well as good high ISO performance.
I doubt that you can see a brighter view or faster AF between an f/2.8 lens and a a f/1.2 lens
Apr 3, 2018 05:33:56 #
Having used a camera for 70 years I would never dream of being as dogmatic as fotoartist
Almost all pictures need different settings in different compositions and at different times to get the best image for you
Almost all pictures need different settings in different compositions and at different times to get the best image for you
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.