Manual mode advice

[Giusi]

Ok, I am really new to photography and just got an xti. Since I want to learn I am venturing on manual mode. Here come my questions:
1. How do I tun off my flash when shooting manual?
2. Why the camera doesn't meter right sometimes...when trying to meter on a bright area it would go from overexposed to underexposed and it wont let me set the dial on 0.
3. What is the real challenge when shooting on manual? I mean, everybody is able to look at the meter and make sure is on 0 before shooting right?

This forum is great, you guys are great. I envy you!!

Thank you so much!

[Cody21]

OK, for starters, you should consider the book: "Undertsanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson ... on Amazon for like $15 .... read this book - 2 or 3 times. It has a wealth of information for grasping the concepts associated with exposure - and Manual control.

As far as the Flash -- if you're truly shooting in Manual mode and have pushed the flash down (e.g., it had not already popped up from a previous exposure attempt), it shouldn't flash ... I don't know the XTI ... maybe there's a setting that you must disable it or something???

[JeffreyG]

3. What is the real challenge when shooting on manual? I mean, everybody is able to look at the meter and make sure is on 0 before shooting right?

This is not shooting on manual. This is shooting Av or Tv but with your rather slow organic microprocessor inserted into the decision loop.

When you shoot manual and chase the needle around, all you are doing is shooting in Av/Tv mode but more slowly. Most manual shooting does not care where the needle ends up at the time of the shot. Some common M mode methods I use:

1. For indoor sports, I set the ISO to 1600, shutter to 1/500, aperture to f/2 and take a shot of someone wearing white. I look at the histogram, and make decisions (go to ISO3200? Go to f/1.8 or f/1.6?) from there. In this case I completely ignore the meter.

2. Similar to the above, I might use the spot meter to check the light level of neutral tones in a scene (grass, skin) or I might use the spot meter to check the brightest and darkest regions in a scene independently. Then I decide what settings to use. I'm only using the meter needle during the spot meter checks.

3. Flash. I set the shutter (1/200 if I only want flash lighting, 1/60-100 with some ambient), the aperture for DOF I want and shoot with the flash. FEC will control the final exposure and so I mostly ignore what that needle is doing. I only need to watch it if it isn't sitting all the way over to the left (ambient very underexposed).

1. How do I tun off my flash when shooting manual?

Push it down.

[Cody21]

Great info (again) Jeff ... I had a question about your last statement: "I only need to watch it if it isn't sitting all the way over to the left (ambient very underexposed)."

In this case, how would you deal with it - using a FLASH of course in the process.? It looks like you already have your Aperture set wide open.

[Perry Ge]

Great info (again) Jeff ... I had a question about your last statement: "I only need to watch it if it isn't sitting all the way over to the left (ambient very underexposed)."

In this case, how would you deal with it - using a FLASH of course in the process.? It looks like you already have your Aperture set wide open.

Drag the shutter - every flash exposure is 2 exposures: flash, and ambient. The flash will expose and freeze the subject, but the light falloff won't light the background, so make the shutter speed slower to expose ambient light. The meter only reads ambient light of course, so if it's way out left then you'll have a dark background.

[JeffreyG]

Great info (again) Jeff ... I had a question about your last statement: "I only need to watch it if it isn't sitting all the way over to the left (ambient very underexposed)."

In this case, how would you deal with it - using a FLASH of course in the process.? It looks like you already have your Aperture set wide open.

Let's talk M and flash.

Suppose you are inside at night shooting a party. There is not enough light to work without flash unless you use a prime lens wide open. So pop up the flash (or better yet, mount a flash and point it at the ceiling).

Now, In M mode you have to decide three things: ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

Shutter speed is easy. When you are in a room lit with tungsten light and you will use a flash they have really different color temperatures. Best to eliminate the tungsten from the equation and set a fast shutter speed (1/200). Here is a quick thing to remember....Shutter speed does not affect the flash at all, it only affects how much ambient light contributes.

Next you pick aperture, probably just stop down enough to get 3-4 people in focus at once. f/5.6 is reasonable, don't go nuts and go to f/16 or something as this will demand too much flash power.

Finally pick ISO. Usually I'll start at ISO 400-800 to help the flash power without getting into a range that has any noise to speak of at all.

At this point the needle will be off the map on the left side. That's fine. The flash will be the sole light source and the camera E-TTL flash metering system will control everything. If you don't like the results you fix it with Flash Exposure Compensation. Fooling with the other settings will have little effect.

Now to what Perry was talking about - dragging the shutter. Using the method I described with the onboard flash may lead to so-so pictures. The biggest problem is that the flash may illuminate the subjects but not the rest of the room behind them. This leads to a "people in a cave" look.

The answer is to drag the shutter. Still in M mode, you are going to slow down the shutter speed - possibly as far down as 1/30. You might increase the ISO and open up the lens to. In this case you are watching the needle and you want the scene to wind up 1.5 stops or so underexposed. What you are doing is making the ambient lighting contribute to the exposure.

When you drag the shutter, do not let the needle get too close to centered. If you do the camera will fire the flash at very low power....so low that the flash will not freeze the motion of the subjects. You still need that super fast flash to freeze them, because you are using what should be too slow of a shutter speed normally.

[Cody21]

Thanks !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cosworth]

When you shoot manual and chase the needle around, all you are doing is shooting in Av/Tv mode but more slowly.


Worst piece of advice I've read on here in a while.

No. I won't bother trying to explain why, because no one listen to the "why" on here anymore.

I suggest you read Peterson's book and your manual some more. Understand what shooting M is and don't dismiss it. You don't what it is by the very description you gave.

[Perry Ge]

Worst piece of advice I've read on here in a while.

No. I won't bother trying to explain why, because no one listen to the "why" on here anymore.

I suggest you read Peterson's book and your manual some more. Understand what shooting M is and don't dismiss it. You don't what it is by the very description you gave.

??? Usually I agree with most of what you say Jason, but here I'm not so sure, maybe you misread his whole post?

Jeffrey was trying to say that switching to M and then adjusting settings so that the needle sits in the middle is the wrong way to shoot in M. He's absolutely right, and he certainly wasn't dismissing M mode, if anything he was recommending it, but saying 'don't do it like that'.

[JeffreyG]

Worst piece of advice I've read on here in a while.

No. I won't bother trying to explain why, because no one listen to the "why" on here anymore.

I suggest you read Peterson's book and your manual some more. Understand what shooting M is and don't dismiss it. You don't what it is by the very description you gave.

OK you will have to explain this. If you pick an aperture and then adjust the shutter speed for each shot so that the meter is always centered, how it that different from Av in any way (other than being slower)?

I'd suggest that you don't understand manual mode Jason....but I know you do. Are you instead struggling with reading comprehension?

[Cody21]

Worst piece of advice I've read on here in a while.

No. I won't bother trying to explain why, because no one listen to the "why" on here anymore.

I suggest you read Peterson's book and your manual some more. Understand what shooting M is and don't dismiss it. You don't what it is by the very description you gave.

OK - well I "listen" and am very interested in knowing WHY that was bad advice. Can you take time to at least try to explain this to me?????

[PhotosGuy]

OK - well I "listen" ... The reason I use M is so I control the exposure to what I need for that image. If I just wanted the meter centered, I could use one of the other modes.

These might help explain why: Need an exposure crutch? (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=89123)

exposing to the right. (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml)

[irishman]

I don't understand why anyone shoots manual.

[cosworth]

I don't understand why anyone shoots manual.

To have the most control when wanting to achieve an excellent exposure.

The camera is not as smart as I am. Metering is an art that if the AV/TV modes had perfected, would render many photographer's skills obsolete.

Thankfullly this has not happened.

[Glenn NK]

I don't understand why anyone shoots manual.

Because I'm way smarter than the camera and its meter.

No, I'm not being smart, but with experience, one learns that there are many situations where one can pick the ISO, the shutter and the f/stop and shoot away with no need to let the meter try to make a mistake.

I realize that cameras have light meters that by and large do a pretty good job of metering. But, there actually was a time when cameras didn't have meters and a separate and quite expensive meter was required.

The human eye is quite sensitive, and with some (forced) practice, it becomes pretty good at estimating light levels.

[Mark_Cohran]

I don't understand why anyone shoots manual.

Because the human brain is a better computer than a logic chip in a camera.

[cosworth]

Think how long it would take to futz around with exposure compensation to get the sky to not blow out below. You'd probably meter once or twice to nail it, chimping along the way.

My brain knows that sky will tolerate at least a stop of light. So why not set your camera for that and shoot away in bliss? I adjusted my camera maybe 3 times during this parade. I changed lenses more than I changed exposure I bet.

http://www.jasonhollister.com/images/lunar_dragon.jpg

[JeffreyG]

My brain knows that sky will tolerate at least a stop of light. So why not set your camera for that and shoot away in bliss? I adjusted my camera maybe 3 times during this parade. I changed lenses more than I changed exposure I bet.

So you shot that one by adjusting the meter needle to be centered?:rolleyes:

Or would you like to go back and explain your attack on me for "the worst advice".:(

[SkipD]

So you shot that one by adjusting the meter needle to be centered?:rolleyes:When I'm shooting all day in manual exposure mode, I seldom use the camera's built-in meter for anything but an indicator that the lighting may be changing (due to clouds moving in that I might not have noticed, etc.). I almost always use a handheld meter either in incident mode or in 1° spotmeter mode to make the measurements that I ultimately use to decide how to set the camera.

A really good example of why I choose to use manual (rather than let the camera decide on exposure for each shot) is shooting an automobile race where each shot could have a car or cars with radically different colors or reflective qualities. The camera would, very likely, overexpose the background when the majority of the image is filled by a very dark car or underexpose the background on a very light colored car. I want all of my shots in a series - regardless of which car or cars are in each of the shots - to have exactly the same exposure setting so that the background looks the same for a whole series and each car looks the way people see them.

[cosworth]

So you shot that one by adjusting the meter needle to be centered?

No I didn't. You didn't really read what I typed.

It's not an attack. It's just stating fact.

[yogestee]

Ok,,,,lets talk about exposure..Exposure is a reciprocal E= I x T where E is Exposure, I is intensity of light (aperture) and T is time (shutter speed)..

If you change I (aperture) you must also change T (shutter speed) to get the same result..E.g. Exposure = F/8.0 x 125th sec is the same as F/11 x 60th sec or F/5.6 x 250th sec etc..What I'm saying is only two values govern exposure,,shutter speed and aperture ignoring ISO/film speed/sensor gain for the time..

When you shoot in Manual mode you "manually" select the len's aperture and camera's shutter speed to suit the lighting conditions (intensity) and subject type..If you are shooting with the sun (or light sourse) centreing your camera's exposure needle will usually suffice..Shooting against the sun is a different ball game..Your meter will probably be fooled so overexposure by a stop or 2 is needed..A stop is the halving or doubling of the exposure depending if you are under or overexposing..

Experienced photographers know how much extra exposure to give,,that is open up the lens or decrease the shutter speed when the subject is back lit

Jurgen

[Cody21]

Think how long it would take to futz around with exposure compensation to get the sky to not blow out below. You'd probably meter once or twice to nail it, chimping along the way.

My brain knows that sky will tolerate at least a stop of light. So why not set your camera for that and shoot away in bliss? I adjusted my camera maybe 3 times during this parade. I changed lenses more than I changed exposure I bet.



That's a very cool shot Jason. Question for you regarding the sky & how you rmetered it. I noted that the EC is 0 in that shot. When you said you know that the "sky will tolerate at least a stop of light" ... are you meaning that when you metered the shot (thru the camera, right) you stopped down the Shutter speed, or what?? I note that your aperture was set at 7.1 ... thanks!

[cosworth]

There is no "EC" in M. That's why it is set to zero in EXIF.

I metered the sky plus one stop. In the viewfinder it would look one full stop overexposed. Not "zero" or "center" but plus one. The blue sky and the dark shadows were balanced and could be enhanced or modified in post.

I then shot for a while. Keeping an eye on the cloud cover. Soon it clouded over with snow clouds (white out) and I metered for the scene, knowing that no matter what I did the sky would blow out. It snowed like mad about 45 minutes later.

[JeffreyG]

No I didn't. You didn't really read what I typed.

It's not an attack. It's just stating fact.

No Jason. I gave the exact same advice in post #3 that you (and others) have been giving later in this thread, and you ripped me for it in post #8. You confused Perryge #9, me #10 and the OP.

Go back and read it and then tell me what you were talking about. That is what prompted my sarcastic response in post 18.

Fundamentally, I was offended that you completely misread my post, ripped me for it and then blithely plowed on in the thread undeterred.

I said the same as you....put the camera in M and adjust everything so the needle sits on "0" every time and you are not really using M.

[cosworth]

I said the same as you....put the camera in M and adjust everything so the needle sits on "0" every time and you are not really using M.

No. I do not put the "needle" on zero. What part of this don't you get? I've said it already even. Are you REALLY reading what I type?

See why I don't get into the M discussion much anymore? Most don't understand it.

[Cody21]

Gents -- I think you're both saying the same thing. "If we DO put the "needle" in the dead center of internal camera meter, then we are NOT really shooting in Manual Mode."

No need to fight over this.... we all value BOTH of your input in this forum !!!!!!

Peace.

[Perry Ge]

lol Jason, Jeffrey, calm down. Jason: Jeffrey is saying the exact same thing as you, I don't know why you're reading it as if he is saying the way to shoot M is to chase the needle, because that's not what he's saying.

Ahh the joys of internet misunderstandings. Anyway, it's not an issue of Jason vs Jeffrey, as they are saying the same thing. The point is this:

M is the only mode where you can set the exposure completely independently of the camera's meter. That's where its real power lies. The meter can be used as a guide, sure, but it has no say on what the settings are in the end - only you have that say. And if the light isn't changing, there isn't much reason to be changing your exposure settings depending on where you point the camera, which is something every mode other than M will do.

[JeffreyG]

No. I do not put the "needle" on zero. What part of this don't you get? I've said it already even. Are you REALLY reading what I type?

See why I don't get into the M discussion much anymore? Most don't understand it.

Jason....Post 18 was me being sarcastic.

But I can see you didn't go back and read #3 (me) and then #8 (you erroneously slamming me) as I suggested. Until you do, you will not understand why I am offended.

Right now you are figuratively in your own corner of the boxing ring with your head down and punching the stuffing out of your own trainer. Lift your head for a second and look around to see what you are punching.

[Moppie]

Apprently there is a new Street Fighter due out this year: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10493090

I believe they have 2 new characters; Cosworthson and Big Jeffery G


"FIGHT!"

[cosworth]

I suck at that stuff. I'm more of a Goldeneye kinda guy. Flight Sim/dogfight I'm in.

[JeffreyG]

I suck at that stuff.

Not so good at recognizing a small error on your part and perhaps offering a small apology either.

[cosworth]

Jason: Jeffrey is saying the exact same thing as you...

Sarcastic (self proclaimed in a PM) comments aside he has said that I have that I put the needle in the middle.

So you shot that one by adjusting the meter needle to be centered?:rolleyes:

Or would you like to go back and explain your attack on me for "the worst advice".:(

No, M is far more than that.

In my shot I had set the meter to a specified amount of light to be let in. Meter "zero" has nothing to do with it. I said "let this much light in". As I move the camera around I let the same light in. Preserving the sky and the building exposures. I get consistent exposure.

So I'll travel back in time and set my camera to AV or TV (unimportant which mode I use) and as I swing my camera around the metering change due to light and dark subjects coming into field of view. The sky gets blown out or I lose any dynamic range in the shadows.

I send myself back in time a second time and i stand around moving the camera around adjust the meter in AV/TV and adding exposure comp to what I think will be the needed settings or I try to use my time limited Exposure Lock. Pressing buttons, adjusting stuff I'm playing like mad trying to control the light and meter.

The me that was there in the first place shooting M is getting far more shots, more consistent exposures and is firing off frames at a good clip. AV/TV me (first one) is getting a similar amount of shots but the images suck since they wildly scale from hot skies to black shadows. Second me with AV/TV and futzing with exposure compensation to try and mimic the control I have with M is losing shots. I'm constantly adjusting the camera trying to get the right exposures. I'm fighting myself.

I learned the hard way about shooting M when I ran a business in the Caribbean. I was getting craptastic shots with Av/TV. the light was hard and constant, but why was I getting such over blown or dark shots where the shadows were noisy and not sellable? Well the light didn't change. the colour of bikinis changed, the light reflected off the water did, the sand filled more of the frame etc.

M solved the problem.

Now to claim that shooting in M and zeroing the meter is AV or TV mode is fine if you are assuming that the camera is on a tripod and not moving and that the shooter is actually not using the info from the meter - is correct. but people who shoot in M don't do that. Maybe people new to M and not knowing their camera all that well do that - but I didn't.

M is taking a metered amount of light that you "know" works and then you shoot with it until you sense that the light has changed or you sense that a change will make the shot better. Light doesn't change that much, your meter LIES to you.

If you plan to shoot M, don't assume that zeroing the meter is what we do. Not at all. You'll not learn much that way. M is interrupting the mistaken relationship between meter and shutter and introducing the photographer into the equation.

Take control of your camera and stop the see-saw post processing hell that some find themselves in fixing exposure when their meter tells their shutter/aperture what to do.

That being said, I and many others have typed this same mantra about 100 times in other threads. It falls on deaf ears often and that's unfortunate.

[cosworth]

Not so good at recognizing a small error on your part and perhaps offering a small apology either.

I say the same to you.

[Perry Ge]

Haha Jason, this whole thing was a conspiracy to get you to type that all out again :lol:.

And I'm pretty sure we all agree with what you say :D. It's very unfortunate that this doesn't get listened to, and I've definitely seen and participated in the threads where n00bs argue that M is just a slower version of Av and Tv. I know how bloody frustrating it is arguing with someone who doesn't understand the concept of not relying on the camera's meter.

Like I said, to put it simply:

M is the only mode where you can set the exposure settings completely independently of the camera's meter. And that's why it gives the photographer power :cool:.

[cosworth]

Claiming "sarcasm" when something goes awry is far worse that just saying "I wasn't being clear".

[JeffreyG]

Jason and I have retired to PMs but I have figured out the misunderstanding.

OP stated that he was twirling the knobs to center the needle.

I told OP that doing that is simply working in a crippled Av/Tv mode.

Jason interpreted my statement as suggesting that I meant that all use of M mode was simply a crippled form of Av/Tv....exactly the opposite of my meaning.

And Jason....when I put the :rolleyes: at the end of my question it was to signify sarcasm in "So you shot that one by adjusting the meter needle to be centered?:rolleyes:"

Because, you know, obviously you didn't just center the needle in M mode. At that point in the thread (before this thing completely derailed) I simply assumed that comment would have you re-read my post #3 and you would realize you had taken my meaning 100% opposite from what I said and then we would move on. The :rolleyes: were supposed to be a special clue to aid this non-verbal forum.

[Moppie]

"FINISH HIM!"


I think Jason needs to go play with his Cosworth, take it for a real long fast drive, and burn off some stress :)
If not, I will gladly come over and take it for a drive instead.

[stellgar]

I don't understand why anyone shoots manual.


There will be times when severely blowing out the highlights or underexposing shadows on purpose is exactly the effect you want. The manual setting gives you complete artistic control.

[Perry Ge]

"FINISH HIM!"

You're confusing Street Fighter with Mortal Kombat :p.

[Moppie]

You're confusing Street Fighter with Mortal Kombat :p.

I must also be showing my age, I'm old enough to have played, and remember both, and older enough to get them confused. :o

[Perry Ge]

I must also be showing my age, I'm old enough to have played, and remember both, and older enough to get them confused. :o

You can't be that old if you played both, especially since your avatar is Optimus Prime :lol:, though that could be more to do with the work than with age maybe? I'm 20 and I remember both clearly.

[Moppie]

You can't be that old if you played both, especially since your avatar is Optimus Prime :lol:, though that could be more to do with the work than with age maybe? I'm 20 and I remember both clearly.

Your old enough to remember reruns, I watched, and remember the orginal transformers series when it first came out in 1984 :)

(waits for someone to remember the first radio braodcast, or mention a time when all cameras only had M as a shooting mode......)

[Perry Ge]

Your old enough to remember reruns, I watched, and remember the orginal transformers series when it first came out in 1984 :)

(waits for someone to remember the first radio braodcast, or mention a time when all cameras only had M as a shooting mode......)

Hey my first camera only had M as a shooting mode! I remember when my dad tried to explain to me (I was 6, maybe 7 at the time?) how to focus using the split-screen hahahaha.

[rooeey]

I know someone already said this but Bryan Petersons UNDERSTANDING EXPOSURE is the best book i have bought...

I read this changed to M and never went back...

[yogestee]

or mention a time when all cameras only had M as a shooting mode......)

Yep thats me..I remember buying my first automatic (aperture priority) Nikon in 1979,,a Nikon FE..I hardly ever used it in Auto Mode.. I bought the FE2 in 1983..I still have the FE2,,brilliant camera,,I put the occasional roll of film through it..
I also have a 1971 vintage Nikon F..Along with the Nikon F2AS Photomic probably the best Nikons ever made..

[Cody21]

I know someone already said this but Bryan Petersons UNDERSTANDING EXPOSURE is the best book i have bought...

I read this changed to M and never went back...


Ditto - the kind people here recommended that to me about 2 months ago and I also read it - twice - and have not gone back to my crutch AV/TV. :D

[Cody21]

I'm almost afraid to ask this ... now be kind to me... this question is for Jason.

Jason, OK, fair enough -- you clearly never use AV/TV mode. But could you go thru your thought process on how you metered that shot you included in this thread? Like, you had an aperture in mind initially (f/7.1?) when you approached the shot. How did you come up with the shutter speed & ISO if you don't rely on your meter - and giving the blow-out characteristics of the bright sky while getting the contrast of the darker areas.

Just curious how you approach and capture such a great shot. Or do you shoot 3-4 shots of the same and chimping each? Thanks

[jim9449]

Hi is this the book that is recommended
Understanding Exposure: How to Shoot Great Photographs with a Film or Digital Camera - Bryan Peterson

[Mike McCusker]

Hi is this the book that is recommended
Understanding Exposure: How to Shoot Great Photographs with a Film or Digital Camera - Bryan Peterson


Yes

[cosworth]

I'm almost afraid to ask this ... now be kind to me... this question is for Jason.

Jason, OK, fair enough -- you clearly never use AV/TV mode. But could you go thru your thought process on how you metered that shot you included in this thread? Like, you had an aperture in mind initially (f/7.1?) when you approached the shot. How did you come up with the shutter speed & ISO if you don't rely on your meter - and giving the blow-out characteristics of the bright sky while getting the contrast of the darker areas.

Just curious how you approach and capture such a great shot. Or do you shoot 3-4 shots of the same and chimping each? Thanks


Although there are recent pictures showing otherwise, I don't usually chimp. I take one shot to check the red channel and I'm ready. If the light changes, i meter, chimp the red channel and move on.

I do use my meter, but I use it to tell me how much light is being averaged by my preferred metering mode "centerweighted average". I then decide what shutter and aperture to use. It becomes VERY intuitive after a short time and chimping can help you ramp up the curve there.

I pointed the camera at the sky. I measured the light, i chose a f/stop based on my focal length/lens at the time. A 17-40. I know a 17-40 at f/5.6 has a nice wide DOF, wide open is a little sift and f/8 shows almost a hyperfocal a range. I decided on a shutter speed that would freeze motion or allow a touch of movement blur to add effect. I decided on an ISO to match my settings to my preferred allocation of light.

In short, I meted the sky, chose f/stop and shutter then used ISO to get me about a stop overexposed on the sky.

Remember that it's easier to hit the fill light slider and maybe kill off some shadow noise than to have to replace totally blown out sky. I had about 15 points on the fill light slider and hit the curves to reel in some extra blue sky.

[Perry Ge]

Although there are recent pictures showing otherwise, I don't usually chimp.

Where are these supposed photos of you chimping? :D

But yeah, your process sounds pretty similar to mine. Center-weighted average, chimp once to make sure red channel isn't blown, pick shutter speed, aperture, adjust ISO for exposure and roll with it.

[cosworth]

In the NYC thread someone took a shot of me formatting a card. Great "chimping" shot.

[Karl C]

...I decided on an ISO to match my settings to my preferred allocation of light...

...In short, I metered the sky, chose f/stop and shutter then used ISO to get me about a stop overexposed on the sky.

Just out of curiosity, why did you adjust the ISO? Why not select a baseline ISO (ex: 100) and then adjust the shutter based on desired f/stop?

Or am I misunderstanding what you wrote?

[Cody21]

Thanks Jason !!

[JCH77Yanks]

To have the most control when wanting to achieve an excellent exposure.

The camera is not as smart as I am. Metering is an art that if the AV/TV modes had perfected, would render many photographer's skills obsolete.

Thankfullly this has not happened.

True indeed!

[cosworth]

Just out of curiosity, why did you adjust the ISO? Why not select a baseline ISO (ex: 100) and then adjust the shutter based on desired f/stop?

Or am I misunderstanding what you wrote?

Aperture = Depth of field control.

Shutter= freezing motion

ISO = I used to shoot film. ISO in digital is nearly irrelevant. Noise at higher ISO doesn't bother me. See my sig for my experiments with high ISO.

You didn't misunderstand. ISO is usually the last thing I adjust when the sun is up.

ISO fear is prevalent among newer digital photographers. Reducing noise is such a worry to them since all they read about is ISO and or noise control amongst cameras. They then shoot wide open (losing dof control and introducing softness/chromatic aberration) and slowing the shutter down (introducing motion blur) in order to suck as much light into the sensor in order to reduce ISO noise. IS can only do so much.

A noisy image is far more usable than one that is out of focus.

Take a bunch of POTN users give them ISO 100 film and some non-IS f/4 lenses and let them loose in a city - handheld only. The images that come back could be pretty sad.

[JeffreyG]

Yup, you used to pick your ISO when you loaded the film and if you wanted to change it you had to rewind the roll and switch. Not the kind of thing you would do shot to shot.

I think in some respects the two wheel controls on the dSLRs are simply descended from this. Nikon offers auto ISO as a step in the right direction (when shooting auto metered), but a third wheel for this third leg of the exposure would acknowledge the real difference from film to digital.

IMO placing ISO as a secondary (i.e. press a button and then spin) setting is not quite right. ISO is an equal leg for control. As Jason suggested, as least in the range from 100-1600 it's not something to worry about overmuch. I might try to push exposure up at 1600 and I do only go to 3200 when I really need to, but otherwise I use higher ISO.

[Cody21]

Jason, et al ... This is GREAT information!! I too have fallen into the trap that higher ISO's (>400) are very "noisy" ... you have seriously changed my thinking (and readings) on this topic...

[Karl C]

Aperture = Depth of field control.

Shutter= freezing motion

ISO = I used to shoot film. ISO in digital is nearly irrelevant. Noise at higher ISO doesn't bother me. See my sig for my experiments with high ISO.

You didn't misunderstand. ISO is usually the last thing I adjust when the sun is up.

ISO fear is prevalent among newer digital photographers. Reducing noise is such a worry to them since all they read about is ISO and or noise control amongst cameras. They then shoot wide open (losing dof control and introducing softness/chromatic aberration) and slowing the shutter down (introducing motion blur) in order to suck as much light into the sensor in order to reduce ISO noise. IS can only do so much.

A noisy image is far more usable than one that is out of focus.

Take a bunch of POTN users give them ISO 100 film and some non-IS f/4 lenses and let them loose in a city - handheld only. The images that come back could be pretty sad.

Thanks for the reply. I learned photography using film too but am not concerned about noise. I've never given up the habit of using just one ISO (or ASA), based on the situation. Adding in the changing of ISO during a shoot would require me to modify my workflow, a learning curve.

Anyway, thanks.

BTW, I could survive on ASA 100 and non-IS lenses. ;)

[Welby]

Manual is the way to go. I shot some pics the other day at an indoor car show with ISO 1600 on my 400D and kit lens and they turned out just fine. Crank that ISO up and don't be scared ;)

[BottomBracket]

Aperture = Depth of field control.

Shutter= freezing motion

ISO = I used to shoot film. ISO in digital is nearly irrelevant. Noise at higher ISO doesn't bother me. See my sig for my experiments with high ISO.

You didn't misunderstand. ISO is usually the last thing I adjust when the sun is up.

ISO fear is prevalent among newer digital photographers. Reducing noise is such a worry to them since all they read about is ISO and or noise control amongst cameras. They then shoot wide open (losing dof control and introducing softness/chromatic aberration) and slowing the shutter down (introducing motion blur) in order to suck as much light into the sensor in order to reduce ISO noise. IS can only do so much.

A noisy image is far more usable than one that is out of focus.

Take a bunch of POTN users give them ISO 100 film and some non-IS f/4 lenses and let them loose in a city - handheld only. The images that come back could be pretty sad.

Speaking of ISO, I remember my old film days when ASA(ISO) 400 was a real treat. Though we occasionally used to push process BW film up to 800 or 1600 with the inherent grainy results, I was normally shooting with ISO100 film.

Photographers today are so spoiled (and I mean that in a nice way) since high ISO usage is so routine, not to mention the number of shots one can shoot in a session has increased exponentially. When I was young, I used to shoot only one roll in an afternoon, that's 36 shots. Maybe 2 rolls if I had extra money, but that was rare. I had to think about every shot before pressing the shutter.

It would do good to go back to film every now and then. It's like a speed governor that slows down the photographer to think about every shot.

[Perry Ge]

Jason, et al ... This is GREAT information!! I too have fallen into the trap that higher ISO's (>400) are very "noisy" ... you have seriously changed my thinking (and readings) on this topic...

Do you shoot Nikon or something? :p jk

Proper exposure has far more bearing on final image quality and noise than high-ISO settings do, these canon camera are all excellent at handling high ISO noise, so just choose the one you need for proper exposure and you're good.

Don't believe me? Try taking an underexposed shot at ISO400 and a properly exposed shot at ISO3200 or whatever your highest ISO is (or have the red channel just hug the right hand side of the histogram if shooting in natural light). I guarantee you the ISO3200 shot will look better, have more detail, and less noise.

This shot is one I made at ISO 1600 on a 400D. Noisy eh ;)?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1032/1460926757_4426a2a854.jpg?v=0 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/perryge/1460926757/in/set-72157602322766899/)

[JeffreyG]

Photographers today are so spoiled (and I mean that in a nice way) since high ISO usage is so routine, not to mention the number of shots one can shoot in a session has increased exponentially. When I was young, I used to shoot only one roll in an afternoon, that's 36 shots. Maybe 2 rolls if I had extra money, but that was rare. I had to think about every shot before pressing the shutter.

Film was a good brake on slowing down shooting, but a bad brake on learning. Shooting film makes experimentation more costly and the delay from shot to print reduces that instant lesson. Those of us that are lousy note takers struggled even more.

[Perry Ge]

Film was a good brake on slowing down shooting, but a bad brake on learning. Shooting film makes experimentation more costly and the delay from shot to print reduces that instant lesson. Those of us that are lousy note takers struggled even more.

As much as I love film, I have to agree. I stopped shooting for a few years because I no longer had access to a darkroom, but really took off again when I got my old 400D.

Now I have regular access to a darkroom, so I shoot film every now and again, but I wouldn't dream of doing film work if I didn't have access to it.

[BottomBracket]

I agree, film is a double edged sword. It will definitely slow one down, and force to photographer to think more about each shot. On the other hand, it may extinguish the desire to shoot altogether, which isn't a good thing. That was during pre-digital days.

Now a third option is available, shooting digital. It takes much self discipline to learn to compose and think about each shot when shooting digital, and my hat is off to those who want to explore the nuances of exposure and composition rather than spraying and praying.

[Glenn NK]

Aperture = Depth of field control.

ISO fear is prevalent among newer digital photographers. Reducing noise is such a worry to them since all they read about is ISO and or noise control amongst cameras. They then shoot wide open (losing dof control and introducing softness/chromatic aberration) and slowing the shutter down (introducing motion blur) in order to suck as much light into the sensor in order to reduce ISO noise. IS can only do so much.

A noisy image is far more usable than one that is out of focus.

Take a bunch of POTN users give them ISO 100 film and some non-IS f/4 lenses and let them loose in a city - handheld only. The images that come back could be pretty sad.


ISO fear is one thing, but it's getting so many around here are paranoid about it. Do a search for NOISE and the problem will become quite apparent - it's probably the most frequent topic of posts - other than "is my lens sharp" (no the focus/DOF is off because of low ISO:lol:).

I routinely use 640 on my 30D (based on blackframe noise tests). Shot a bundle of images at a birthday party on Sunday using 1250 and 1600. Noise wasn't an issue at all - the mixed lighting was (daylight + fluorescent + flash).

We've got to get over this noise paranoia - I consistenly see images posted that were taken at 100 and 200 and frequently there is motion blur and no DOF (shooting wide open), then they say "my images aren't sharp". No kidding.;)

[JeffreyG]

ISO fear is one thing, but it's getting so many around here are paranoid about it. Do a search for NOISE and the problem will become quite apparent - it's probably the most frequent topic of posts - other than "is my lens sharp" (no the focus/DOF is off because of low ISO:lol:).

I routinely use 640 on my 30D (based on blackframe noise tests). Shot a bundle of images at a birthday party on Sunday using 1250 and 1600. Noise wasn't an issue at all - the mixed lighting was (daylight + fluorescent + flash).

We've got to get over this noise paranoia - I consistenly see images posted that were taken at 100 and 200 and frequently there is motion blur and no DOF (shooting wide open), then they say "my images aren't sharp". No kidding.;)

400 is the new 100. I don't really go below 400 much and I think I've stopped using 100 altogether.

Taking that one step too far, Nikon does not even offer ISO100 on most bodies anymore. This is OK except for the poor buggers who like to shoot waterfalls and streams with the water blurred. Nothing sucks like stacking ND filters.

[Perry Ge]

400 is the new 100. I don't really go below 400 much and I think I've stopped using 100 altogether.

Taking that one step too far, Nikon does not even offer ISO100 on most bodies anymore. This is OK except for the poor buggers who like to shoot waterfalls and streams with the water blurred. Nothing sucks like stacking ND filters.

Haha yeah those folk are getting royally shafted by the high-ISO-centric DSLR world.

But ISO 25 would be sweeeeeeeeeeeeet.

[cosworth]

I'd love to have ISO 25. I love shooting wide open on sunny days. If you want a slower shutter speed you gotta don the polarizer or cokin. Sigh.

[Cody21]

OK OK OK ... I just set my ISO to 400 as my new 100 ... you guys convinced me!

;-)

[Bruce_B]

I'd love to have ISO 25.

Me too :)

I see no reason to abandon low ISO settings just because you can go higher without noise. Sometimes you just need a low ISO to get the exposure you want.

[tonylong]

Regarding "ISO fear", the "gotcha" is that higher ISO speeds do increase inherent noise, which will show up if you 1) have to do a considerable amount of PP exposure compensation, or 2) enlarge your photo to a substantial degree.

Jason has many times emphasized getting the exposure right to minimize high-ISO noise, and that is paramount. But if you really push things (such as using ISO 3200 on even a 5D), you will lose detail due to noise. In this case, you want a well-framed as well as well-exposed shot, because enlarging will simply show up the loss of detail.

Different cameras will also have different ISO/noise characteristics, so it would be helpful to characterize your camera. With my 30D, for instance, I don't like to go above ISO 800, but with a 5D or a 1D, I'm perfectly content in lower light situations leaving my camera on ISO 1600, although with both I do resort to some noise reduction in Lightroom. I don't know about the 40D, but with the 400D (my daughter has one so I'm still experimenting) I would hesitate to default to 1600.

So, if you have a well-framed and well-exposed shot, you can push your camera to its limits, but you just have to know what its acceptable limits are.

[Glenn NK]

400 is the new 100. I don't really go below 400 much and I think I've stopped using 100 altogether.

Taking that one step too far, Nikon does not even offer ISO100 on most bodies anymore. This is OK except for the poor buggers who like to shoot waterfalls and streams with the water blurred. Nothing sucks like stacking ND filters.

Take a peek at this; it might be useful. I have done the blackframe tests on my 30D and I get the same results as the chart, although Sheehy's first 30D didn't measure up too well so he exchanged it (some people assume that all bodies are identical).

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=19721647&page=1

The software to do the tests is available no charge from:

http://astrosurf.com/buil/

It's quite easy to use.