olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

A personal choice. In my mind "Full Manual" is just that, manual adjustment of all settings. However, even though I shoot manual nearly all the time, I sometimes-to-often times "float" the ISO due to another consideration; ISO Invariance - many modern cameras are ISO Invariant (up to a certain top range)...due to this I find no real issues with floating the ISO (using Auto ISO) for a given ISO range, and often use a range from 100-to-3200, especially in low light situations such as early morning, late day into evening, in the woods under canopy/low light, etc. This enables many shots that would otherwise require other methods, added light, or more preparation to achieve. It is also helpful for smaller aperture lenses, zooms and such. In my situation it is "no harm/no foul" to float ISO, YMMV, and others may or may not agree.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Hi Augie. Your question is valid. But the fuss over the argument is pretty silly.

Let me tell you why I believe that.

As often as not, I leave my camera set in program mode. I do that for a couple of simple reasons. Most of the time, I find that I can accept my cameras' meter readings with great confidence as the basis for correct exposure. If I am going to do that, there is no meaningful difference between me spinning the dials to set the exposure and letting the camera do the spinning. Allowing the camera to set both aperture and shutter speed allows it to (most of the time) avoid extreme values of either one. But this week, I have been working in the back yard on my focusing techniques. My best subjects have been iris blooms. These blooms are fairly large in all three dimensions, so managing depth of field is important. So in order to get best results, I switched to Aperture Priority and set my lens to f11 in order to capture full blossoms in focus.

I do not prefer to use auto-ISO. Many people here get excellent results with it, and my cameras all perform well over a wide range of ISOs, but I still don't prefer it. The reason is that even though noise isn't a real problem until sensitivities get really high, the character of images changes noticeably even at moderate levels. While I am not averse to post processing (some of what I shoot simply cannot be accomplished without it), my preference is to minimize it. That's simply not where I get my greatest enjoyment from the hobby, especially if it can be avoided. So I don't want to find out later that I need to replace some lost saturation or readjust some altered contrast because the system changed the sensitivity.

Now please note...when I changed exposure modes as described above, it turned out that I did have to go back and manually adjust my ISO choice. The selection of f11 resulted in a shutter speed that I could not manage (and which would not stop movement created by the occasional breezy gusts of wind). So I had to choose to increase the ISO level I at which I was shooting...from 200 all the way to 800. But I'm aware of the change and know that it may necessary to make some color adjustments later.

To me, the much bigger and more important question to answer as we utilize the capabilities of our cameras is, "Do we understand the metering options that our cameras offer and how to choose and use them?" If we don't understand when to choose Spot, Center Weighted, Matrix, or (for some of us) Highlight Weighted metering, it really doesn't matter whether we are making manual adjustments to center a match-needle display or using the camera's built-in systems to make sure those adjustments are made.

To answer the basic question...using Auto-ISO is not manual exposure control. But the thing is...it doesn't matter. It's just one more option for adjusting exposure. It is a functionality that you paid for when you bought your camera. I don't choose to use it. Many do, with really good success. It may work for you as well.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

The logical disconnect is in trusting the camera's meter in the first place and, on discovering that it's wrong, having to use the exposure control to offset that error.

With full manual you can still use the meter as a reference but you can also ignore it and rely on other information.

Ultimately the one thing you need to avoid is blowing highlights that you care about. The camera's meter can't guarantee that. But there are safer ways to deal with it like highlight warnings and highlight weighted metering. Or experience.

BebuLamar

If cameras are ISO invariance then you should keep your ISO low and not letting it float. You would underexpose many of the shots but with ISO invariance you can fix that in post. If you over expose you can't fix that in post even if you have ISO Invariance.

bleirer

EV goes on theoretically forever in both directions, but this Calculator says EV -8 is a good target. I think there is reciprocity failure in long exposures but don't have experience.

http://xjubier.free.fr/en/site_pages/astronomy/MilkyWayExposureCalculator.html

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Well, if the argument is that measuring light with your eye is more accurate than a CORRECTLY used meter, I’m not buying that, but if the argument is that skill and judgement are important in learning to use the meter correctly, then I’m all in. No argument about not blowing highlights, but one way to do that (and use the full DR of the sensor) is to correctly meter them.

GLKTN Loc: TN

I am fairly new to all this. I have been told to use the lowest ISO for correct exposure. Use native ISO when possible. Remember rules are suggestions.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

I would just add that intentionally underexposing with an ISO invariant camera is not a great technique, but I agree that it’s better than blowing highlights.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

So you have been using AUTO ISO.

Jerry G Loc: Waterford, Michigan and Florida

"had questions about using manual mode properly"

The proper way to use manual is the way that gets the result you want. There are purists who think everything needs to be done manually and there are those who use automated features their cameras provide, neither are wrong if they get good results. Using manual everything and using automated features both have a learning curve. With manual the learning curve is obvious but getting consistent results when using auto functions has a learning curve as well. When using automated functions on your camera you need to set limitations when available, you need to use exposure comp when needed, and you need to keep track of when limits have been reached. I use manual everything taking most pictures but also use auto iso when taking wildlife pictures or when clouds are constantly passing by. I think many of those who won't use auto anything believe you give up control when there are actually quite a few controls while using auto functions. The idea of a proper way to use manual rings as an idealistic approach, use what you are comfortable using and try to experiment with methods you you think might help you in you endeavors.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

If you put them in order of significance (i.e. having the potential to spoil a shot), I would agree with that order.

However, #1 is relevant only if there's significant movement within the scene being captured (not always the case) or when using lots of zoom (in which case camera shake is a potential problem).

wapiti Loc: round rock, texas

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

The main cause of blurred action is too low of a shutter speed, which ... yes ... indicates rapid movement to a degree.

I shoot a lot of sports/action/reenactments and a high shutter speed is imperative.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Yes.

Although I seldom used my K-30 above 800, i limit my Pentax KP to 12800, although it has given me good results at even higher values.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-631428-1.html

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I shoot a lot of mountains. So far none of them have displayed any tendency to move suddenly or unexpectedly (which is just one of the things I like about them ).