• Ghundredpanorama_fish_eye
    758 posts
    2 years ago

    I'm also a fan of keeping the ISO as low as possible. Smaller sensors don't like high ISO's, nor are they keen on big exposure/shadow pushes. I shoot m4/3, so consider fast primes to be essential for any low light work that has any type of movement in them. The 1.4 primes are the sweet spot for me, equivalent to 2.8 in 135 format, can still get reasonable DOF, and combined with a trip through DXO pure raw can get quite good results, without the weight associated with some of the larger format gear. Some of my favourite tiny primes are the Panasonic Leica 9mm f1.7, Laowa 10mm f2, Panasonic Leica 15mm f1.7 & 25mm f1.4, Siggy 30 & 56 f1.4's, the Oly 45 f1.8 & Lumix 42.5 f1.7. The Lumix is great for bodies without IBIS.
    I figure that if Pro's can shoot with 2.8 glass, then I should be able to manage with f1.4.

    Edit -I have no hesitation in cranking the ISO a bit to prevent bad motion blur by the way.

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    If shooting raw, leaving the exposure the same and setting the ISO to a higher value won't affect image brightness when both images are developed with the same user intent, unless you are talking about irrecoverable blown highlights at the higher ISO setting.

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    Of course, at the same exposure, boosting ISO won't prevent motion blur. I think what you mean is you have no hesitation in shortening the exposure to prevent bad motion blur.

  • Ghundredpanorama_fish_eye
    758 posts
    2 years ago

    Yeah it does, as I mostly shoot Aperture mode, so that's the only variable that changes/can change (shutter speed) Which minimises motion blur.

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    You can push in the camera, or you can push in the raw developer. If the black point calibration in the raw developer is accurate, and you don't push more than four or five stops, there is little difference except you'll have better control of the highlights pushing in post.

    The size of the sensor is not a variable here, since you can crop a large sensor to get the same effective sensor size as a smaller one.

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    So you're using ISO to change exposure. In the situations where I know the aperture I want and the minimum shutter speed I want, I use M mode.

  • Ghundredpanorama_fish_eye
    758 posts
    2 years ago

    Which is why I wrote I prefer to use larger aperture primes on a smaller sensor. More light collected, at the expense of less DOF. Without getting into the whole equivalence roundabout/argument.

  • Ghundredpanorama_fish_eye
    758 posts
    2 years ago

    If it's a relatively static scene, then yeah. Go for your life in M mode. But when there's a bit of action going on, with not enough time to be fiddling around setting 2 or 3 different variables, then A mode for me. P1000119-RW2_DxO_DeepPRIME230408.jpg


    P1000114-RW2_DxO_DeepPRIME230408.jpg

    P1000114-RW2_DxO_DeepPRIME230408.jpg

    JPG, 2.5 MB, uploaded by Ghundred 2 years ago.

    P1000119-RW2_DxO_DeepPRIME230408.jpg

    JPG, 2.9 MB, uploaded by Ghundred 2 years ago.

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    I also used to fiddle ISO in aperture priority until it gave me the shutter speed I wanted.

    But then one day I realised I was wasting time fiddling ISO settings until I got the desired shutter speed.

    I thought since I lnow the shutter speed and aperture I want, why not lock them both in in either manual mode or as a minimum shutter speed in aperture priority and then set ISO to Auto.

    The Auto ISO ended up setting ISO to the same value I would have after fiddling with it anyway.

    This saved me time by not having to fiddle with ISO to get the desired shutter speed.

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    just continue what your doing , there is no magic sauce, no one is posting any images to prove one method is better than the other.

  • AlbertM43userpanorama_fish_eye
    56 posts
    2 years ago

    This might be me only for my SOOC JPG shooting.

    If I shoot RAW, I might do my setting with the extra headroom of RAW over JPG in mind. Not to discussed here since every camera might vary.

    In case of my cameras, if I could get maximum exposure (by shutter speed and aperture), they can produce clean enough SOOC JPG (to my acceptable level) at ISO1600 and ISO3200 respectively. Exceed the thresholds I must be very careful on setting otherwise the output could be very grainy.

    For such reason I set upper limit ISO to 1600 & 3200 on respective cameras and am happy to give the freedom for my cameras to play around within the limit but still can produce usable output.

    I shoot in A principally. M only for difficult lighting conditions.

    When reaching the upper ISO limit, my cameras will turn to use slower shutter speed. It is a fact that I must have to accept if I would expect to have a cleaner output. At that time depend on the shutter speed I might opt for certain changes: e.g. use a wider aperture (if possible) to relax on DoF control, or if not, look for extra stability. If still not, hold camera tighter or take multiple shot hoping I could get around handshaking problem. To the last, use higher ISO manually, more careful on exposure setting (relax the original planned margins on shadow, highlight etc).

    IMHO those limits are merely safty measures that help us to work within the optimal limit of our tool. When we hit the wall, we know we have to pay more attention or made changes.

    Upper ISO limit is very useful to me.

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    Deleted. I misread the post I was replying to.

  • Ghundredpanorama_fish_eye
    758 posts
    2 years ago

    No, I don't just doggedly stick to one particular method, I'm open minded enough to experiment & try different techniques. There's so many variables that can make a difference -such as model/age of camera within a particular format, sensors can be different even at the same MP count, the raw converter used, and even the age or updates applied to that raw converter software. I've seen some absolutely horrible results from LR when used on the early 20MP 4/3 sensor cameras, whereas now I think they're not too bad. No first hand experience on the latest LR -I gave Adobe the boot when they moved to the subscription model. I'm still tinkering with different techniques, nearly 8 years after jumping into 20MP 4/3 sensors. The goalposts seem to be continually moving.

  • Ghundredpanorama_fish_eye
    758 posts
    2 years ago

    That's what I wrote. I was referring to M mode in that comment.

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    Yes, I realised that after I posted my reply and have since deleted it.

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    do share, everyone would be very interested in what has worked and what has failed from your perspective.

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    He already has to a large extent in a few earlier posts. If you need a refresher, read on.

  • SrMipanorama_fish_eye
    457 posts
    2 years ago

    Assuming that the light is not strong enough for ISO to hit the base ISO in A mode, I would use M mode with Auto-ISO and -1 EC. You set the slowest shutter speed acceptable so that the motion blur is avoided (or added as you want), and shoot without changing anything on the camera.