Digital SLR Cameras Forum

Digital SLRs Forum Discuss digital SLRs, lenses, RAW conversion, or anything else related to digital SLRs. You may also want to see the Nikon, Canon, and Sony camera forums.
Digital Camera Pro Reviews >>
Read and Write Digital SLR Reviews >>
Digital SLR Buyer's Guide >>
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    n8
    n8 is offline
    Senior Member n8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rockford, Il
    Posts
    1,604

    non "native" iso's

    My understanding is that it's best to use my camera's lowest native iso, but what are the downfalls of using the "lo" iso's? I'm well aware that the hi iso's are going to bring more noise.
    mostly Nikon gear

    Feel free to edit my images for critique, just let me know what you did.

  2. #2
    Be serious Franglais's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    3,367

    Re: non "native" iso's

    With low ISO you have to use a wider aperture and/or longer exposure so there is more risk that your photo is unsharp or that the depth of field that is too shallow. There should be no noise.

    For landscapes I do the same as on medium-format film - native ISO with small aperture, slow shutter speed and camera on a heavy tripod.

    NOTE: I misunderstood the post. I thought he was talking about the native ISO of the sensor. I've never used the "Lo" settings
    Charles

    Nikon D800, D7200, Sony RX100m3
    Not buying any more gear this year. I hope

  3. #3
    Senior Member draymorton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Project Bloomberg
    Posts
    2,131

    Re: non "native" iso's

    Less of a dynamic range, but not noticeably so. Lo is very useful in many situations.

  4. #4
    Senior Member BlueRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    1,026

    Re: non "native" iso's

    Just to compliment what Charles said...the ideal is to use the lowest ISO possible but under "poor" light conditions that will make the exposure time to long which is not practical in most cases, so using a higher ISO along the aperture value will influence the exp. time.
    There are no rules per say, the point is to get the correct exp. baring in mind the exp time according to the subject or scene.

    Canon XSi
    Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM
    Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS
    1. "A true photograph need not be explained, nor can it be contained in words."Ansel Adams
    2. "Photography is more than a medium for factual communication of ideas. It is a creative art."Ansel Adams

  5. #5
    n8
    n8 is offline
    Senior Member n8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rockford, Il
    Posts
    1,604

    Re: non "native" iso's

    So, why the Lo1, Lo 0.7, Lo 0.3, then 200,250, etc... up to 3200, then Hi 0.3, Hi 0.7, Hi 1 rather then calling the hi and low by their actual iso number?
    mostly Nikon gear

    Feel free to edit my images for critique, just let me know what you did.

  6. #6
    Panarus biarmicus Moderator (Sports) SmartWombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,750

    Re: non "native" iso's

    Because Nikon are just different.
    It may be they don't map exactly to the ISO numbers ?
    PAul

    Scroll down to the Sports Forum and post your sports pictures !

  7. #7
    Learning more with every "click" mjs1973's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Mineral Point, WI, USA
    Posts
    7,562

    Re: non "native" iso's

    I read a blog post by a pro once that said by using the Lo ISO settings, you are going to introduce more noise into the image. The same way that you do by using a high ISO setting. Not sure of the technical reasons why... He went on to say that it would be better to us a neutral density filter to lower your shutter speed than to use the Lo ISO setting. I have never tested it myself so I don't know if this is true or not.
    Mike

    My website
    Twitter
    Blog


    "I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunters' paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view."
    Aldo Leopold

  8. #8
    Nature/Wildlife Forum Co-Moderator Loupey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    7,856

    Re: non "native" iso's

    On the newer Canon bodies I really can't see a difference in image quality using ISO 50 or 100 verses ISO 200 or even sometimes 400 (if there is little shadow in the scene).

    I don't think there are "downfalls" to using Lo. It's just more tools to offer you more control. If you need longer exposure times or want a shallow DOF in bright light (like a portrait outdoors), then having Lo is extremely handy and preferred over using ND filters IMO.
    Please do not edit or repost my images.

    See my website HERE.


    What's a Loupe for anyway?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •