Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 14 Sep 2010 (Tuesday) 08:40
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "Which is more important to you? ISO or aperture?"
ISO
26
14.7%
Aperture
151
85.3%

177 voters, 177 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Aperture vs ISO

 
smugfuzz
Member
48 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Sep 14, 2010 08:40 |  #1

Which is more important/useful to you? Larger aperture or higher useable ISO?

Thinking of switching to a Nikon system (D3s, 21 zeiss, 50 1.4, 100 zeiss) but afraid I'm going to miss shooting the Canon primes wide (or close to) open too much.

So which is it for you?

ISO (which equals the Nikon for me)
or Aperture (Canon)


Dan
5dii, 40D,
17-40L, 24TSE II, 35L, 85L II, 100 MP ZE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,831 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Sep 14, 2010 08:47 |  #2

I don't think I can answer your question the way you pose it, but my lenses are too important to me to consider a switch to Nikon. And overall I'm not unhappy with my Canon bodies.


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
newworld666
Goldmember
Avatar
2,306 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Jan 2009
Location: on earth
     
Sep 14, 2010 09:34 as a reply to  @ timnosenzo's post |  #3

:shock: ... I don't know what you mean.... :confused: because they are complementary :
-> ISO is mainly use to get the right speed to freeze the subject,
-> Aperture is mainly use to get the right dof to isolate as much as possible the subject and get smoothest bokeh if it's wished.


I would say, I trust 5DMKII iso till 3200 iso, so I can set my body to auto and use the right aperture to obtain the right DOF and consequently the get best isolation of my subject and get the smoothest bokeh.
So, I only use 24L1.4II, 85L1.2II and 300L2.8 to get as much margin as possible to get small dof for far subjects, and not be obliged, like with slow zoom, to be on my subject.


Marc
5DMKII+1Dx 24L1.4II 85L1.2II 180L3.5 300F2.8nonIS TC2XII ..... Sigma14F2.8AFDG, Zuiko 500F/8 Reflex
http://myc-photos.eu (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rvdw98
Goldmember
Avatar
1,592 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Netherlands
     
Sep 14, 2010 09:49 |  #4

smugfuzz wrote in post #10905995 (external link)
Which is more important/useful to you? Larger aperture or higher useable ISO?

Thinking of switching to a Nikon system

Would you actually switch systems based on what's important to someone else?


Roy

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Sep 14, 2010 10:09 |  #5

Depends how high of an ISO one needs. I shoot ISO3200 regularly with my 5DII and occasionally 6400. I see no need for higher ISO that cannot be replaced by fast enough lenses. I have no idea what you shoot or how large you print...so I have no idea why high ISO is important to you. If you don't print large or you only post to the web then high ISO is a moot point. imo. I think I have 2 shots on my site, taken with the 5DII, that have had any noise reduction added and that was an ISO6400 pushed 2 stops. Came out quite nice after downsizing.

So, for me..... give me a 5DII and glass.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cptrios
Goldmember
Avatar
1,744 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Boston, USA / Burgundy, France
     
Sep 14, 2010 10:50 |  #6

I suppose if I were an indoor sports shooter, ISO would be more important...who wouldn't want a camera with super-clean ISO 102400? I think the big question there isn't so much "would you prefer high ISO performance or wide apertures" as it is "is it worth ditching all of my glass and buying a camera that costs twice as much as mine just to get (admittedly substantially) better high ISO performance?" And the answer to that, of course, is "it depends on why you need it."

Personally, half of the point of an SLR is DoF control. So I'd take a 35L, 85L, and 135L over a D3s any day of the week.

(Donations are accepted, by the way!)


Fuji X100 / Sony NEX-7 / Contax G 45mm f/2 / The ghosts of 3 Canon bodies past / A meagre amount of talent
My weak lil' 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
richardfox
Goldmember
Avatar
1,883 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Bellbrook, Ohio, USA
     
Sep 14, 2010 10:58 |  #7

A good philosophical question, for sure. Really would depend on your subjects more than just a "yes or no" answer, or at least that's what I'd think. Lenses can only go so fast due to limits of physics and design (and COST!), but it looks like ISO can be pushed up incredibly. Everything comes into play with this question, and I certainly have no answer. I rarely ever shoot any faster than 1600, and that's a rarity itself. With so much available in PP, does one really need extreme ISO or expensive ultra-fast lenses? I would guess for fast moving subjects only, and if you aren't shooting sports, what would be the need to go radically higher in ISO over having faster lenses? Comments, anyone? Just to satisfy my own curiosity!


Canon 50D gripped, EF 50/1.8, EF-S 10-22, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L, 100/2.8 macro, 100-400L, 300 2.8L, Canon 500 f8 mirror with chipped EF mount, 580EX, 1.4x and 2x Canon teleconverters, Canon EF Life-Size converter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gedanken
Senior Member
741 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:01 |  #8

Aperture. If you couldn't let enough light in, you're at a disadvantage from the get-go.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:09 |  #9

Not uness you can boost the ISO and get good results. This is why the answer is not cut and dry.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:12 as a reply to  @ bohdank's post |  #10

Well I dont shoot High ISO's that often so give me the fast lenses any day.:p


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alpha_1976
Goldmember
Avatar
3,960 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2009
Location: USA
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:15 |  #11

These two are different things but if I have to choose just one - I'd say aperture for sure as aperture does many other things as well.


I know more about gear than I know about photography :p
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:16 |  #12

Nikon only looks better at super high ISOs which are still too ugly for real work. So I think the premise is flawed.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scubthebub
Senior Member
Avatar
894 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Aliso Viejo, CA
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:16 |  #13

Gedanken wrote in post #10906737 (external link)
Aperture. If you couldn't let enough light in, you're at a disadvantage from the get-go.

+1, I think the only time I bump up the ISO is if the lens I'm using is not fast enough for the given lighting conditions. Of course, if you have really good ISO performance then you have a larger buffer you can fill between your lens aperture and the lighting conditions.


You can also call me Matt
|| 5Dc+Grip | 20D || 24-105
L | 50 f/1.8 II | Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 <-Crap on FF |
| 550EX | Yongnuo RF 602 triggers | Aperture 3 | Lowepro Pro Trekker 300 AW |

Flickr (external link) | Redbubble (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wimg
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,655 posts
Likes: 31
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Netherlands, EU
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:20 |  #14

Both are important to me, hence I didn't vote.

5D II is eminently usable at 3200 iso, and at 6400 iso there is just a little less detail. Same with 1D Mk III, although the noise on the 1D III at 6400 iso can be reduced to nothing if you want, whiel retainign all detail (see here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=720571).

Since I somehow never have enough light, I need both high iso and wide apertures.

Kind regards, Wim


EOS R & EOS 5 (analog) with a gaggle of primes & 2 zooms, OM-D E-M1 Mk II & Pen-F with 10 primes, 6 zooms, 3 Metabones adapters/speedboosters​, and an accessory plague

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thatkatmat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,340 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 199
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, don't move here, it's wet and cold
     
Sep 14, 2010 11:22 |  #15

wimg wrote in post #10906845 (external link)
Both are important to me, hence I didn't vote.

Right, me too, I think Canon has a pretty good mix of the two..


My Flickr (external link)
Stuff
"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." -Jimmy Conway
a9, 12-24/4G, 24-70/2.8GM, 100-400GM, 25/2 Batis, 55/1.8ZA, 85 /1.8FE, 85LmkII, 135L...a6300,10-18/4, 16-50PZ, 18-105PZ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,805 views & 0 likes for this thread
Aperture vs ISO
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is sandyn1024
902 guests, 238 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.