Don't shoot above ISO 1600!

For those who shoot RAW and with a 5D Mark II, do not shoot above ISO 1600, according to this interesting article.

http://www.guillermolu​ijk.com/article/isos5d​mkii/index.htm

This was a total eye opener for me. You are better off underexposing your shot at ISO 1600 and fixing it in LR/ACR than you are by correctly exposing your shot at ISO 3200/6400/12800/etc. (Again, I'm only speaking to RAW shooters. Shooting above ISO 1600 only benefits JPG shooters.)

The downside of underexposing your scene means the image on your camera's LCD screen will be too dark, but this is not a big problem if you're shooting still subjects.

Of course, you should always shoot at the lowest ISO that available light will permit, but if you must shoot at a higher ISO, forget about going higher than ISO 1600. You will lose more than you will benefit if you do so.

.
I haven't had a camera yet that can give me the kind of clean, no-grain images I want at anything higher than 1600 ISO.

I now use a 5D Mark 4, and when I go over 1600, there is grain that I can see and that interferes with the extremely fine detail I am trying to capture.

So I agree - if you want the kind of IQ that I want, and if you want it without having to use any noise reduction software, then don't shoot above 1600 ISO.


.

The article is probably interesting but can't read it

I shoot raw and am happy at about any ISO depending on what I am shooting. The 5d2 however isn't really any better than the 5d pertaining to ISO performance, so it is no surprise most don't like the 5d2 a whole lot if they go higher than 1600.

I have bird shots at 6400 from crop bodies that have feather detail, so it has quite a bit to do with the shooter as much as it does with the camera in what kind of keepers the shooter ends up with. I think it is 60% camera, 40% human in how the high ISO shots end up.

To read the article, click your browser's translate command.

The author demonstrates that increasing the ISO to 200, 400, 800, or 1600 will help minimize noise (only when slowing the shutter is not an option, mind you). But once you've stepped over ISO 1600, the camera's noise control technology stops working (or more aptly levels off). To make matters worse, increasing the ISO from 1600 to 3200 or higher will incrementally deteriorate your dynamic range. In situations of extreme low light, the author recommends (if I understood him correctly) to set the ISO to 1600 (the point at which the 5D MKII's noise suppression breaks down) and then go ahead and push your shadows up digitally in LR/ACR. Granted, you will drive up shadow noise when you post process (there's no getting around that), but at least your dynamic range will not worsen. If, instead, you choose to shoot at ISO 3200 or higher (like I've always done thinking I had no other option), then you will suffer both from more noise AND less dynamic range. Its a tradeoff. Like everythig else.

Thanks.Sometimes you have to. 40,000

digital paradise wrote in post #19077886
Thanks.Sometimes you have to. 40,000

Hosted photo: posted by digital paradise in
./showthread.php?p=190​77886&i=i260065419
forum: General Photography Talk

Not shabby. But try shooting that same scene at ISO 1600 and do a digital push in LR/ACR. If the article is correct, then the noise will be the same, but the dynamic range will be better. By ISO 1600, I mean whichever ISO your camera loses control of its noise (presumably higher than the now-ancient 5D Mark II).

texshooter wrote in post #19077883
To read the article, click your browser's translate command.

The author demonstrates that increasing the ISO to 200, 400, 800, or 1600 will help minimize noise (only when slowing the shutter is not an option, mind you). But once you've stepped over ISO 1600, the camera's noise control technology stops working (or more aptly levels off).

It levels off in the midtones, but the shadows still improve up to 6400, which is max analog gain for the 5D2. When shooting in some colors of light (deep shade, halogen), you can see horizontal banding noise in the 5D2 at 6400 without any pushing, exposing for ISO 6400 at the 1600 setting would make that banding 4x as strong.

How does that "make matters worse"? That is the normal "matter" of digital cameras, and rare is the camera that gives you more headroom at higher ISOs.

That is a generic trade-off that exists with almost all cameras. If you don't need the extra headroom, there is usually no point in allowing lots of extra highlights if it increases noise. Bringing this up in the context of the 5D2 makes no sense to me, because the 5D2 is one of the cameras that needs analog gain the most, having so much post-gain banding noise. Guillermo was probably just pointing out at the time that the decrease in noise (with a given exposure) slows down after 1600, but it is still very strong in that camera, and was true of most Canons back in 2009.

That's how it always is with analog gain, and digital gain that mimics analog gain by multiplying RAW values. If you want more headroom without potential clipping, under-expose at a lower ISO, but with some cameras, especially the 5D2, there can be a serious shadow noise penalty for that.

texshooter wrote in post #19077890
Not shabby. But try shooting that same scene at ISO 1600 and do a digital push in LR/ACR. If the article is correct, then the noise will be the same, but the dynamic range will be better. By ISO 1600, I mean whichever ISO your camera loses control of its noise (presumably higher than the now-ancient 5D Mark II).

I’ll try that out. Thanks.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19077830
I shoot raw and am happy at about any ISO depending on what I am shooting. The 5d2 however isn't really any better than the 5d pertaining to ISO performance, so it is no surprise most don't like the 5d2 a whole lot if they go higher than 1600.

I have bird shots at 6400 from crop bodies that have feather detail, so it has quite a bit to do with the shooter as much as it does with the camera in what kind of keepers the shooter ends up with. I think it is 60% camera, 40% human in how the high ISO shots end up.

.
TS, I have seen some of the high ISO bird images that you posted recently, and the results are very impressive.

What you say about noise grain being dependent on the user, almost as much as it is dependent on the camera and settings, is very interesting to me. . I fear that I am one of those users who ends up with more noise in my photos than most people do, because I see unacceptable noise grain even at 1600 ISO with my 5D4.

So, my question for you is:

What is it that some users do, when taking the photos, that results in grainier images? . And what are the other users doing that result in less grain? . Of course I am talking about what we do at the time of capture; not about using software to remove the grain afterwards.

I mean, if two photographers are shooting the same bird from the same distance with the same camera body and the same lens and the same exposure value and all of the same settings, why will one user get a lot of grain and the other not get any grain? . What is the one guy doing wrong? . I ask because I am afraid that I am the guy who is getting the noise, and I want to change that.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19078225
.

I am talking about what we do at the time of capture; not about using software to remove the grain afterwards.

.

Try shooting at 160-multiple ISOs (640, 1280, 2560, 5120) instead of multiples of 100 (800, 1600, 3200, 6400). And never shoot multiples of 125 (500, 1000, 2000, 4000). You'll give up a little dynamic range, but your RAWs will have less noise, when shooting at high ISOs. I have not tested this theory out yet.

I have a 10yr old camera, I never shoot above ISO 1000. My technique and of course 4-stop image stabilisation allows me to shoot at speeds of 1/30s. I will be spoilt if my next camera will give me a clean noise free image at iso 4000

texshooter wrote in post #19078291
Try shooting at 160-multiple ISOs (640, 1280, 2560, 5120) instead of multiples of 100 (800, 1600, 3200, 6400). And never shoot multiples of 125 (500, 1000, 2000, 4000). You'll give up a little dynamic range, but your RAWs will have less noise, when shooting at high ISOs. I have not tested this theory out yet.

.
That is precisely the opposite of what many super-successful, world-class bird and wildlife photographers have told me. . But I guess it's worth trying ...... at least I can test it out on "practice" subjects, so I won't ruin any real bird opportunities if it doesn't work out.


.

PCousins wrote in post #19078297
I have a 10yr old camera, I never shoot above ISO 1000. My technique and of course 4-stop image stabilisation allows me to shoot at speeds of 1/30s. I will be spoilt if my next camera will give me a clean noise free image at iso 4000

90% of my subjects would be a blury mess at 1/30s regardless of IS. My ISOs live in the stratosphere and I'm OK with that because it gets the shot.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19078301
.
That is precisely the opposite of what many super-successful, world-class bird and wildlife photographers have told me. . But I guess it's worth trying ...... at least I can test it out on "practice" subjects, so I won't ruin any real bird opportunities if it doesn't work out.

.

Despite what written here noise is usually increased by underexposing and then pushing in post. I've found it's much better to nail your exposure and then clean up whatever native noise you get in post. Obviously the camera is an important. Recently I shot some birds on a cloudy day using auto iso and I drifted to 3200 and above had only minor noise reduction to fix minimal noise.