What is iso? Well, here is how Nikon explains it. "ISO originally referred to the sensitivity of film-it's "light gathering" ability. The higher the ISO rating, the greater the film's ability to capture images taken in low light. High ISO film was called fast film-it required a shorter exposure than a low ISO film. For digital photography, ISO refers to the sensitivity-the signal gain-of the camera's sensor" NIKON
Nikon's marketing department, not their engineers. The explanation makes no sense and is electronically illiterate. First, 'sensitivity' and 'signal gain' are different things. Applying signal gain after the detector (sensor) does not change sensitivity. The ISO control does not affect or change the sensitivity of the sensor.
High Iso is no problem on modern cameras. On my Canon 500D I didn't dare to go abover Iso 800. On my 5DII, 1600 was the limit. On my 5DIII it was 3200. With my new R6 I have no issues with Iso 6400 or even 10.000. It's better to get a noise but sharp picture than a clear picture with a blurry subject.
One technique not mentioned, maybe in a future video, is using a camera's ISO invariance. That is, under exposing to preserve the highlights while gaining the same higher shutter speed, and which results in the same amount of noise as raising the ISO, but helps preserve highlights. (requires post processing.) Check the camera's shadow improvement versus ISO setting in photos to photons to check for ISO-invariance.
Ian, my understanding is that ISO was about sensitivity of film to light, but in digital photography it is about the degree to which your camera's software boosts the signal coming from each pixel on the sensor. Is that correct? Enjoyed the video!
Yeah that's right, that's why you get similar levels of noise if you underexpose the image in camera and then boost the exposure in post production. 👍 it's interesting how increasing the iso reduces dynamic range 👍
Absolutely correct. ISO is not a name, it's an acronym. People keep treating it like a name. Back in the 70's they changed ASA (American Standards Association) to ISO (International Standards Organizarion). I (we) fully understand the usage of the three letters ISO and thank you for applying it to its digital use. I always like Ian's videos.
In film days one was limited by the film that was put in the camera, whether B&W or colour. Thus interchangeable film backs or multiple bodies if you could afford it. Variable ISO gives far more opportunity to obtain the best shot.
ISO number don't mean anything at all. It's equivalent to the electronic gain of older video cam from 20 years ago. We put numbers such as 200, 800, etc because of what photographers today, many coming from film, are used to. Look at it as a linear scale of electronic gain.
Great videos, was wondering do you still use the sunway Foto gh+ geared head , I got one and found that when it is locked down - it still did a micro creep, before settling, would you know if this a characteristic of geared heads , or maybe I just got a poor unit , thank you 😊 Douglas
I still can’t understand why photographers are using Lightroom instead of Photoshop.. the raw editing environment opens when you open a RAW file in Photoshop. There you can pre-process incredibly accurately, including noise reduction, lens aberrations, chromatic abaration, and then open the photo in Photoshop for precise editing using layers that are not present in Lightroom. are.
Another useful review, Ian. An additional reason to be pragmatic about using higher ISOs is that technological advances in recent years have done much to offset the downside. This applies to better sensors in most cameras, as well advances in processing software, including LRC and more niche products like Topaz.
Excellent overview of ISO. With current post-processing software, noise from high ISO is easily corrected. Lightroom's DeNoise or Topax DeNoise AI frees the 'Tog from worrying about noise.
I never knew about that dynamic range vs ISO thing - just checked and, on my Z6, once I'm at ISO 500, it turns out I may as well regard the next setting as ISO 800 due that dip in the graph ...
Great video. I never knew about Photo DR vs ISO. I went to that website and it turns out I'm better at ISO 500 than 200 for DR and it allows me to bump up my shutter if I want to. Thank you, Ian. Great photo at the end.
Another fab and useful video Ian. Looked a bit wild on the coast. Your photos were excellent considering the battle against the elements. Well done.👏👏👏
First of your videos I’ve seen, and it earned a like and a sub. Hope to see many more. Nothing to add here, but I usually comment just to skew the algorithm. Back in the days of film I shot mainly Tri-X at 800 ISO. To this day I’m more comfortable with a higher ISO (600 to 1600) on my Pentax K-1, but the old K-10D (10mp) gives richer colors below 400. Yes, Pentax!
Another great video Ian. I never print larger than A3 and don't have any problem shooting up to ISO 6400 with the Nikon Z7. I love the flexibility this gives me.
Awesome video, Ian! It's very helpful as I am always worry about the noise by using high ISO. Love your photos even under such bad condition you're still get excellent results!
A point on the Fuji, you need to be at ISO 640 or upwards to use your DR at 400%. And because of the amplifier it would appear there is no difference between 400 and 800 ISO regarding noise.
I've been surprised at the effectiveness of the AI noise reduction settings available in current versions of Adobe Lightroom and DXO Photo lab. It rubs against my preference to use too post processing, but especially in dim indoor lighting, it is an image saver when I have to push up the ISO.
Thanks for your video. Photo tip: edit the reflection too like you have with the ruin/castle and water reflection, so you can see the stars and sky in the reflection too. I see you used another and longer exposure for this, so there should be enough stars/lines visible. Water reflection is almost always darker than the sky. Keep up the great work you do :)
After many years of trying, I still can’t really master what ISO to use on my XH1. The image quality of the photos never seems to be consistent. Even at base ISO of 200, many of the raw images always seem ‘washed out’. I’m at a loss as to the cause - is it me, camera or conditions…
Sorry if I’m butting in here but how much post processing of the RAW images are you doing? Most RAW are flat and washed out when they come out of the camera. They are made like that in the expectation that you will tweak them afterwards. Are you shooting RAW+jpeg and, if so, do the jpeg also look washed out?
Thanks for this interesting video. But... You said many times that "is not a bad habit to raise the ISO up" (and I agree), but during your shooting session shot at 125 ISO... what am I missing? :D
Sorry, full of errors and fallacies. ISO (pronounced 'eye-so') is not the camera's sensitivity to light, nor does raising the ISO introduce noise. ISO is an exposure index, a guide to setting exposure. The higher the ISO the lower the exposure that you will be using, it is the low exposure that causes the noise, not any effect of 'ISO'. Your whole tradeoff between 'sensitivity' and image quality is a falsehood. The tradeoff is between exposure and image quality, given the the sensitivity of the camera does not change. Exposure is controlled by available light, f-number and shutter speed, so if your choice of exposure is constrained by those, you just go with the ISO given by those cnstraints.
What is iso? Well, here is how Nikon explains it.
"ISO originally referred to the sensitivity of film-it's "light gathering" ability. The higher the ISO rating, the greater the film's ability to capture images taken in low light. High ISO film was called fast film-it required a shorter exposure than a low ISO film. For digital photography, ISO refers to the sensitivity-the signal gain-of the camera's sensor" NIKON
Nikon's marketing department, not their engineers. The explanation makes no sense and is electronically illiterate. First, 'sensitivity' and 'signal gain' are different things. Applying signal gain after the detector (sensor) does not change sensitivity. The ISO control does not affect or change the sensitivity of the sensor.
High Iso is no problem on modern cameras. On my Canon 500D I didn't dare to go abover Iso 800. On my 5DII, 1600 was the limit. On my 5DIII it was 3200. With my new R6 I have no issues with Iso 6400 or even 10.000. It's better to get a noise but sharp picture than a clear picture with a blurry subject.
One technique not mentioned, maybe in a future video, is using a camera's ISO invariance. That is, under exposing to preserve the highlights while gaining the same higher shutter speed, and which results in the same amount of noise as raising the ISO, but helps preserve highlights. (requires post processing.) Check the camera's shadow improvement versus ISO setting in photos to photons to check for ISO-invariance.
Ian, my understanding is that ISO was about sensitivity of film to light, but in digital photography it is about the degree to which your camera's software boosts the signal coming from each pixel on the sensor. Is that correct? Enjoyed the video!
Yeah that's right, that's why you get similar levels of noise if you underexpose the image in camera and then boost the exposure in post production. 👍 it's interesting how increasing the iso reduces dynamic range 👍
Absolutely correct. ISO is not a name, it's an acronym. People keep treating it like a name. Back in the 70's they changed ASA (American Standards Association) to ISO (International Standards Organizarion). I (we) fully understand the usage of the three letters ISO and thank you for applying it to its digital use. I always like Ian's videos.
In film days one was limited by the film that was put in the camera, whether B&W or colour. Thus interchangeable film backs or multiple bodies if you could afford it.
Variable ISO gives far more opportunity to obtain the best shot.
Not only software, but sensor is electronicly set to diffeerent levels. Do not only software thing
My camera is mostly set to auto ISO except if I want dark shadows or movement in the image 📷👍
ISO number don't mean anything at all. It's equivalent to the electronic gain of older video cam from 20 years ago. We put numbers such as 200, 800, etc because of what photographers today, many coming from film, are used to. Look at it as a linear scale of electronic gain.
Love your videos dude really informative and thorough. You’re british not american though Nikon Zed8 no “zee” 8. 😉
Great videos, was wondering do you still use the sunway Foto gh+ geared head , I got one and found that when it is locked down - it still did a micro creep, before settling, would you know if this a characteristic of geared heads , or maybe I just got a poor unit , thank you 😊 Douglas
3:0 Raising your iso to 3200 does not allow your sensor to suck in more light. Shutter speed and aperture allow that. Iso is amplification. Foemp.
I still can’t understand why photographers are using Lightroom instead of Photoshop..
the raw editing environment opens when you open a RAW file in Photoshop. There you can pre-process incredibly accurately, including noise reduction, lens aberrations, chromatic abaration, and then open the photo in Photoshop for precise editing using layers that are not present in Lightroom. are.
Another useful review, Ian. An additional reason to be pragmatic about using higher ISOs is that technological advances in recent years have done much to offset the downside. This applies to better sensors in most cameras, as well advances in processing software, including LRC and more niche products like Topaz.
Thanks, great comment 👍
wow this video is a mine opener quite inspiration do you do workshops ?????
Excellent overview of ISO. With current post-processing software, noise from high ISO is easily corrected. Lightroom's DeNoise or Topax DeNoise AI frees the 'Tog from worrying about noise.
very true 👍👍
Topaz have not updated Denoise Ai for a long time. All their efforts are on the fabulous Topaz Photo Ai provided your computer has enough power for it
I never knew about that dynamic range vs ISO thing - just checked and, on my Z6, once I'm at ISO 500, it turns out I may as well regard the next setting as ISO 800 due that dip in the graph ...
It's an interesting point, glad its helped you out.
Great video. I never knew about Photo DR vs ISO. I went to that website and it turns out I'm better at ISO 500 than 200 for DR and it allows me to bump up my shutter if I want to. Thank you, Ian. Great photo at the end.
Glad it was helpful! 👍👍
Ian, really like your enthusiastic way of presenting your videos and teachings.
Glad you like them! 👍🙏
Where are you located do you do worshop
Another fab and useful video Ian. Looked a bit wild on the coast. Your photos were excellent considering the battle against the elements. Well done.👏👏👏
Glad you enjoyed it, yes super wild, just what i like. haha
First of your videos I’ve seen, and it earned a like and a sub. Hope to see many more. Nothing to add here, but I usually comment just to skew the algorithm. Back in the days of film I shot mainly Tri-X at 800 ISO. To this day I’m more comfortable with a higher ISO (600 to 1600) on my Pentax K-1, but the old K-10D (10mp) gives richer colors below 400. Yes, Pentax!
Another great video Ian. I never print larger than A3 and don't have any problem shooting up to ISO 6400 with the Nikon Z7. I love the flexibility this gives me.
That's awesome 👍👍
Just makes me want to get out there and get some images. Trouble is I’m stuck at a desk all week and miles away from anywhere interesting 😞
hope you can get out soon 👍
At 7:02 with that guitar into It sounded like Ian was about to start singing! I thought, oh _a treat_ 😂
Great video as always. Happy new year!
May i know what is the focal length you used in both shots? They are beautiful!
Awesome video, Ian! It's very helpful as I am always worry about the noise by using high ISO. Love your photos even under such bad condition you're still get excellent results!
A point on the Fuji, you need to be at ISO 640 or upwards to use your DR at 400%. And because of the amplifier it would appear there is no difference between 400 and 800 ISO regarding noise.
I've been surprised at the effectiveness of the AI noise reduction settings available in current versions of Adobe Lightroom and DXO Photo lab. It rubs against my preference to use too post processing, but especially in dim indoor lighting, it is an image saver when I have to push up the ISO.
Thanks for your video. Photo tip: edit the reflection too like you have with the ruin/castle and water reflection, so you can see the stars and sky in the reflection too. I see you used another and longer exposure for this, so there should be enough stars/lines visible. Water reflection is almost always darker than the sky.
Keep up the great work you do :)
Interested video
After many years of trying, I still can’t really master what ISO to use on my XH1.
The image quality of the photos never seems to be consistent. Even at base ISO of 200, many of the raw images always seem ‘washed out’.
I’m at a loss as to the cause - is it me, camera or conditions…
Are you shooting in raw?
Yes raw
Sorry if I’m butting in here but how much post processing of the RAW images are you doing? Most RAW are flat and washed out when they come out of the camera. They are made like that in the expectation that you will tweak them afterwards. Are you shooting RAW+jpeg and, if so, do the jpeg also look washed out?
Thanks for this interesting video.
But... You said many times that "is not a bad habit to raise the ISO up" (and I agree), but during your shooting session shot at 125 ISO... what am I missing? :D
There wasn't a need to raise my iso during that session. I was getting nice results at those settings.
Sorry, full of errors and fallacies. ISO (pronounced 'eye-so') is not the camera's sensitivity to light, nor does raising the ISO introduce noise. ISO is an exposure index, a guide to setting exposure. The higher the ISO the lower the exposure that you will be using, it is the low exposure that causes the noise, not any effect of 'ISO'. Your whole tradeoff between 'sensitivity' and image quality is a falsehood. The tradeoff is between exposure and image quality, given the the sensitivity of the camera does not change. Exposure is controlled by available light, f-number and shutter speed, so if your choice of exposure is constrained by those, you just go with the ISO given by those cnstraints.
Very interesting video Ian, I'm struggling to get my head around the exposure triangle but this video explains a lot. Thank you so much
Great video as always love your content
Thanks buddy 👍
Great video. Thanks Ian 👍
Thanks for watching 👍👍
Excellent
Thank you! Cheers!
Thanks!
A great refresher course! Thanks for taking me along!
Glad you enjoyed it! 👍👍
Another great video - thanks Ian!
Glad you enjoyed it 👍👍
The word every photographer is using, EPIC!
Thanks for the epic comment 😂
Nice one Ian ,have a nice Christmas.
Thanks, you too!
Another fantastic video 🙏📷
Glad you enjoyed it 👍
Thankyou ❤❤❤❤
You're welcome 😊
Wow that seascape at 10:15 was truly glorious.
Thanks so much. 👍👍
The Earth does not rotate the earth is flat
oops, i forgot about that. 😂😂
No my friend. Earth is concave. Proof? Look how the heels of Your shoes wears off.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
But it is spinning😉