Beginner 4 years on...and my relationship with ISO values

Hi,

About 4 years ago I posted on the forum for the first time.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4557524

I’d recently upgraded from an ancient Samsung S6 smartphone to a brand new S21 and having used the S6 extensively to take wildlife shots in the garden of birds, bugs and blooms, I was ready to have my mind blown with the improvement in the camera quality of the S21…I was distinctly underwhelmed!

Anyway, this led me to consider purchasing my first ‘proper camera’ since it was pointed out to me that the quality I was wanting/expecting from my photos might simply not be possible from a smartphone, even a very good one. Folk here were incredibly generous with their knowledge, opinions and suggestions and I ended up buying a second hand Panasonic FZ1000 mk1 since I wanted to keep things relatively portable and avoid having to carry several lenses.

As a first time camera I think it’s undoubtedly been the right choice for me, it’s taught me a huge amount about the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO but I will also say that I’ve come to realise it’s limitations in trying to achieve the type of shots I see in all the birdwatching magazines and the plethora of pro/semi-pro photographers who post on social media.

I went into the purchase with my eyes open, I knew it was going to be an incredibly steep learning curve and that has proved to be the case - it can still frustrate and reward in equal measure. In the first couple of years I didn’t use it anywhere near as much as I should and I also ended up getting very bogged down in reading about ‘how’ to take photographs rather than just going out and taking photographs whilst learning from my mistakes.

Soon after getting the camera I read Graham Houghton’s extensive user manual/book which went a little over my head at times tbh and last year I read Stephen Ingraham’s book ‘Point and Shoot Nature Photography’ which I dare say would send cold chills down the backs of professional wildlife cameramen and women but it did resonate with me a bit and left me telling myself, get out there, take some pictures and get some real world experience of how different settings affect the captured image.

I said this in my post 4 years ago and I repeat it now, I’m very much aware of the skill of the photographer who’s learnt their trade, learnt the theory, learnt how to use their equipment in order to get the very best image they can, it’s a lot more than just having an expensive camera and lens and I respect and admire them immensely.

In his book, Stephen Ingraham suggests making use of the program mode on the camera, mixed with using shutter priority for those situations that demand it such as birds in flight etc and this is something I’ve tried to adopt.

I must say that I find myself in shutter priority mode the majority of the time because it’s mostly birds that I want to photograph, not always in flight it has to be said but more often flitting from branch to branch etc and this has led me to become slightly obsessed with my ISO values since I’m noticing that as the shutter speed increases, understandably, so does the ISO and as I want the sharpest picture, I’m acutely aware of higher ISO values producing grainier images.

What I’ve come to realise is the huge difference shooting on a super bright day can have and I appreciate all the seasoned photographers out there will probably be rolling their eyes at that comment!

I was watching Common Buzzards the other day on a beautiful sunny morning, not a cloud in the sky and with them bathed in sunlight, even with a shutter speed of 1/2000th, my ISO (on auto setting) was as low as 250.

This made me want to push shutter speeds even more and on another equally bright day, I was shooting a Dark Edged Bee-Fly in my garden at 1/5000th and the ISO (again on auto) was only 320 which I thought was incredible at such a fast shutter speed!

However, the downside to this obsession with speed vs ISO is that if I’m now shooting a bird in a bush or tree where the light level is lower and the ISO is hitting around 1000 or above, I tend not to bother because I cannot seem to get the image sharp enough for my taste. If the bird is not moving too fast I’ll try and swap over to program mode and take a few shots (which is what happened with the Chiffchaff photo) and see how they come out – if the camera is selecting a relatively fast shutter speed I can sometimes get lucky with a decent shot with a lower ISO.

What’s the point of this incredibly long ramble I hear you ask, well I don’t really know tbh lol, I kind of wanted to say I did at least follow through with my desire to buy a camera, I would be happy for some critique on the photo’s posted below if that’s ok with forum rules and I’d also like your take on shutter speed vs ISO, are you happy to still take shots if the ISO is heading well north of 1000? Does better equipment produce better results at higher ISO values?

I should say that I’m only shooting in JPEG as I have no means to manipulate RAW files, nor own a computer that will run any of the clever post production software like Lightroom or Photoshop, altho perhaps I may consider looking for a second hand Mac or PC in order to dip my toe in post production waters in due course.

For now I’ll press on with the FZ1000 but I must say I rather like the look of the Nikon Z8 and Sigma 150-600mm Sports lens but that's lottery dream stuff ;-)

Thanks for reading this far and for getting me to this point with my camera.

Nick

You might want to try shooting in manual mode with Auto-ISO.

Photography is about capturing light. The ISO setting tells the camera what to do with the light once it is captured.

In some ways, light is like rain. It is not continuous, but is comprised of tiny "drops" of light. We call these drops "photons".

A sensor is a rectangular array of pixels. Very roughly speaking, each pixel counts the number of photons that reach it while the shutter is open. The raw data is a somewhat processed version of these photon counts.

The ISO setting provides a context for interpreting these photon counts. Consider to shots of the same subject. Both are taken at the same aperture, but one with a shutter of 1/30 and one with a shutter of 1/120. At the shorter 1/120 exposure, the pixels will count 1/4 the number of photons than at 1/30. As the subject is the same, we likely want it to look the same in the JPEG. Very roughly speaking, the ISO setting tells the system how many photons are needed in order for something to be 25% grey, 50% grey, 100% white, etc.

Physics tells us that with fewer photons (lower exposures), we will get a noisier looking image. Therefore we often want to exposures that are high enough so that noise is nto an issue.

.

Let's suppose you are shooting birds. My suggestion is that you use the widest aperture that gives you enough depth of field for your subject. You then use the slowest shutter speed that won't give you unwanted motion blur. This is the highest exposure (most photons) you can get in that situation. Use Auto-ISO in order to get reasonable lightness in your camera produced JPEG.

If you follow these rules you will get the best possible image for the conditions.

Note that larger format cameras don't always give you better results. The advantage of larger formats is that you often have the option of wider aperture diameters. The larger aperture values are tied to shallower depth of field. If the depth of field is too narrow, you need to stop down. Once you are stopping down, you can have used a smaller sensor and gotten the same results.

.

One thing you can try is to get more light on your subject. You may want to look at something like the "Better Beamer Flash Extender". This is a product that puts a fresnel lens in front of your external flash. This gives the flash a narrower field of coverage, and a longer working distance. It can be a real help when shooting birds in flight that are often backlit.

Venger said:

About 4 years ago I posted on the forum for the first time.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4557524

I’d recently upgraded from an ancient Samsung S6 smartphone to a brand new S21 and having used the S6 extensively to take wildlife shots in the garden of birds, bugs and blooms, I was ready to have my mind blown with the improvement in the camera quality of the S21…I was distinctly underwhelmed!

Click to expand...

Newer smartphones have better cameras but still aren’t ideal for your particular interests. The ergonomics of smartphone photography are not good, to say the least.

Venger said:

Anyway, this led me to consider purchasing my first ‘proper camera’ since it was pointed out to me that the quality I was wanting/expecting from my photos might simply not be possible from a smartphone, even a very good one. Folk here were incredibly generous with their knowledge, opinions and suggestions and I ended up buying a second hand Panasonic FZ1000 mk1 since I wanted to keep things relatively portable and avoid having to carry several lenses.

Click to expand...

The FZ1000 is now more than 10 years old, but was quite good for its time. The zoom lens on that series of Panasonics was excellent, but only has a limited aperture range. I note that your examples are all at f/4.

Venger said:

As a first time camera I think it’s undoubtedly been the right choice for me, it’s taught me a huge amount about the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO but I will also say that I’ve come to realise it’s limitations in trying to achieve the type of shots I see in all the birdwatching magazines and the plethora of pro/semi-pro photographers who post on social media.

Click to expand...

There’s really very little to learn about that topic.

Venger said:

I must say that I find myself in shutter priority mode the majority of the time because it’s mostly birds that I want to photograph, not always in flight it has to be said but more often flitting from branch to branch etc and this has led me to become slightly obsessed with my ISO values since I’m noticing that as the shutter speed increases, understandably, so does the ISO and as I want the sharpest picture, I’m acutely aware of higher ISO values producing grainier images.

Click to expand...

The FZ1000 evidently doesn’t handle the higher ISO settings very well. Some of your shutter speeds are unnecessarily fast.

Venger said:

What I’ve come to realise is the huge difference shooting on a super bright day can have and I appreciate all the seasoned photographers out there will probably be rolling their eyes at that comment!

Click to expand...

Indeed.

Michael Fryd said:

You might want to try shooting in manual mode with Auto-ISO.

Photography is about capturing light. The ISO setting tells the camera what to do with the light once it is captured.

In some ways, light is like rain. It is not continuous, but is comprised of tiny "drops" of light. We call these drops "photons".

A sensor is a rectangular array of pixels. Very roughly speaking, each pixel counts the number of photons that reach it while the shutter is open. The raw data is a somewhat processed version of these photon counts.

The ISO setting provides a context for interpreting these photon counts. Consider to shots of the same subject. Both are taken at the same aperture, but one with a shutter of 1/30 and one with a shutter of 1/120. At the shorter 1/120 exposure, the pixels will count 1/4 the number of photons than at 1/30. As the subject is the same, we likely want it to look the same in the JPEG. Very roughly speaking, the ISO setting tells the system how many photons are needed in order for something to be 25% grey, 50% grey, 100% white, etc.

Physics tells us that with fewer photons (lower exposures), we will get a noisier looking image. Therefore we often want to exposures that are high enough so that noise is nto an issue.

.

Let's suppose you are shooting birds. My suggestion is that you use the widest aperture that gives you enough depth of field for your subject. You then use the slowest shutter speed that won't give you unwanted motion blur. This is the highest exposure (most photons) you can get in that situation. Use Auto-ISO in order to get reasonable lightness in your camera produced JPEG.

If you follow these rules you will get the best possible image for the conditions.

Note that larger format cameras don't always give you better results. The advantage of larger formats is that you often have the option of wider aperture diameters. The larger aperture values are tied to shallower depth of field. If the depth of field is too narrow, you need to stop down. Once you are stopping down, you can have used a smaller sensor and gotten the same results.

.

One thing you can try is to get more light on your subject. You may want to look at something like the "Better Beamer Flash Extender". This is a product that puts a fresnel lens in front of your external flash. This gives the flash a narrower field of coverage, and a longer working distance. It can be a real help when shooting birds in flight that are often backlit.

Click to expand...

Hi Michael,

Many thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed reply, it's much appreciated.

Nick

New Wrycuda said:

Venger said:

About 4 years ago I posted on the forum for the first time.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4557524

I’d recently upgraded from an ancient Samsung S6 smartphone to a brand new S21 and having used the S6 extensively to take wildlife shots in the garden of birds, bugs and blooms, I was ready to have my mind blown with the improvement in the camera quality of the S21…I was distinctly underwhelmed!

Click to expand...

Newer smartphones have better cameras but still aren’t ideal for your particular interests. The ergonomics of smartphone photography are not good, to say the least.

New Wrycuda said:

Anyway, this led me to consider purchasing my first ‘proper camera’ since it was pointed out to me that the quality I was wanting/expecting from my photos might simply not be possible from a smartphone, even a very good one. Folk here were incredibly generous with their knowledge, opinions and suggestions and I ended up buying a second hand Panasonic FZ1000 mk1 since I wanted to keep things relatively portable and avoid having to carry several lenses.

Click to expand...

The FZ1000 is now more than 10 years old, but was quite good for its time. The zoom lens on that series of Panasonics was excellent, but only has a limited aperture range. I note that your examples are all at f/4.

New Wrycuda said:

As a first time camera I think it’s undoubtedly been the right choice for me, it’s taught me a huge amount about the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO but I will also say that I’ve come to realise it’s limitations in trying to achieve the type of shots I see in all the birdwatching magazines and the plethora of pro/semi-pro photographers who post on social media.

Click to expand...

There’s really very little to learn about that topic.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I'm a slow learner then but I would've thought that the relationship between those three things is key to creating a well exposed photograph and it's certainly taken a while for me to think more instinctively when out and about with a small fast moving subject in front of me that changing X is going to affect Y.

New Wrycuda said:

New Wrycuda said:

I must say that I find myself in shutter priority mode the majority of the time because it’s mostly birds that I want to photograph, not always in flight it has to be said but more often flitting from branch to branch etc and this has led me to become slightly obsessed with my ISO values since I’m noticing that as the shutter speed increases, understandably, so does the ISO and as I want the sharpest picture, I’m acutely aware of higher ISO values producing grainier images.

Click to expand...

The FZ1000 evidently doesn’t handle the higher ISO settings very well. Some of your shutter speeds are unnecessarily fast.

Click to expand...

To be honest, seeing how far I could raise the shutter speed before higher ISO values made the image unpalatable for my taste was something of an experiment as earlier attempts always resulted in too much noise. Having taken the Buzzards with a shutter speed of 1/2000th and still retain a relatively low ISO value due to how bright the conditions were was a bit of a light bulb moment.

I don't know what your go to shutter speeds would be for an insect that, at times, is moving so fast it's hard to see (altho admittedly they do hover for a fraction of a second now and again) but I started at 1/2000th as with the Buzzards and started increasing the speed whilst keeping an eye on the ISO. For my taste 1/5000th seemed the sweet spot as it captured much more detail than at 1/2000th and at 1/6400th I couldn't see much difference with 1/5000th plus the ISO had started to creep up.

New Wrycuda said:

New Wrycuda said:

What I’ve come to realise is the huge difference shooting on a super bright day can have and I appreciate all the seasoned photographers out there will probably be rolling their eyes at that comment!

Click to expand...

Indeed.

Click to expand...

Venger said:

New Wrycuda said:

The FZ1000 is now more than 10 years old, but was quite good for its time. The zoom lens on that series of Panasonics was excellent, but only has a limited aperture range. I note that your examples are all at f/4.

Venger said:

As a first time camera I think it’s undoubtedly been the right choice for me, it’s taught me a huge amount about the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO but I will also say that I’ve come to realise it’s limitations in trying to achieve the type of shots I see in all the birdwatching magazines and the plethora of pro/semi-pro photographers who post on social media.

Click to expand...

There’s really very little to learn about that topic.

Click to expand...

I would've thought that the relationship between those three things is key to creating a well exposed photograph and it's certainly taken a while for me to think more instinctively when out and about with a small fast moving subject in front of me that changing X is going to affect Y.

Click to expand...

Provided that the camera’s ISO performance is up to the task, the three parameters can be adjusted under automatic control by the camera. For some scenarios, you might want give priority to say, Shutter Speed in your case. Manual mode is another rather obvious option.

Venger said:

I don't know what your go to shutter speeds would be for an insect that, at times, is moving so fast it's hard to see (altho admittedly they do hover for a fraction of a second now and again) but I started at 1/2000th as with the Buzzards and started increasing the speed whilst keeping an eye on the ISO. For my taste 1/5000th seemed the sweet spot as it captured much more detail than at 1/2000th and at 1/6400th I couldn't see much difference with 1/5000th plus the ISO had started to creep up.

Click to expand...

A camera that tracks the movement of the subject can allow you to reduce the shutter speed considerably, and any residual movement (e.g. flapping wings) can impart a sense of reality.

I often allow ISO to range up to 6400 without particular concern...

New Wrycuda said:

Venger said:

New Wrycuda said:

The FZ1000 is now more than 10 years old, but was quite good for its time. The zoom lens on that series of Panasonics was excellent, but only has a limited aperture range. I note that your examples are all at f/4.

New Wrycuda said:

As a first time camera I think it’s undoubtedly been the right choice for me, it’s taught me a huge amount about the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO but I will also say that I’ve come to realise it’s limitations in trying to achieve the type of shots I see in all the birdwatching magazines and the plethora of pro/semi-pro photographers who post on social media.

Click to expand...

There’s really very little to learn about that topic.

Click to expand...

I would've thought that the relationship between those three things is key to creating a well exposed photograph and it's certainly taken a while for me to think more instinctively when out and about with a small fast moving subject in front of me that changing X is going to affect Y.

Click to expand...

Provided that the camera’s ISO performance is up to the task, the three parameters can be adjusted under automatic control by the camera. For some scenarios, you might want give priority to say, Shutter Speed in your case. Manual mode is another rather obvious option.

New Wrycuda said:

I don't know what your go to shutter speeds would be for an insect that, at times, is moving so fast it's hard to see (altho admittedly they do hover for a fraction of a second now and again) but I started at 1/2000th as with the Buzzards and started increasing the speed whilst keeping an eye on the ISO. For my taste 1/5000th seemed the sweet spot as it captured much more detail than at 1/2000th and at 1/6400th I couldn't see much difference with 1/5000th plus the ISO had started to creep up.

Click to expand...

A camera that tracks the movement of the subject can allow you to reduce the shutter speed considerably, and any residual movement (e.g. flapping wings) can impart a sense of reality.

I often allow ISO to range up to 6400 without particular concern...

Click to expand...

So humouring me for a moment, for a static image like that, if you were to fix the ISO at 6400 for example, would the noise level remain the same regardless of whether your shutter speed is 1/100th or 1/2000th - does the shutter speed affect noise levels for a given ISO value?

Venger said:

New Wrycuda said:

Venger said:

....

As a first time camera I think it’s undoubtedly been the right choice for me, it’s taught me a huge amount about the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO but I will also say that I’ve come to realise it’s limitations in trying to achieve the type of shots I see in all the birdwatching magazines and the plethora of pro/semi-pro photographers who post on social media.

Click to expand...

There’s really very little to learn about that topic.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I'm a slow learner then but I would've thought that the relationship between those three things is key to creating a well exposed photograph and it's certainly taken a while for me to think more instinctively when out and about with a small fast moving subject in front of me that changing X is going to affect Y.

Click to expand...

A "Well exposed photograph" is a term left over from the film days. It can lead to confusion when it comes to digital.

With film, one has to hit a certain target exposure. Too high an exposure and the negative is too dense. Too low an exposure and the negative is too thin. These don't affect how dark or light the image looks, as that is determined in the darkroom when you print the image. However improper exposure affected the tone curve, and highlight or shadow detail.

With film you had to use an "exposure centric" workflow. Everything about the process revolves around achieving and maintaining the target exposure for the loaded film. A critical skill for a film photographer was knowing how to make adjustments to aperture and shutter while maintaining that target exposure. If you close the aperture to increase depth of field, you must also alter the shutter speed.

Digital cameras work with a wide range of exposures. There is no need to use a workflow that targets any particular exposure. If you change the aperture to alter depth of field, you can leave the shutter speed alone. With Auto-ISO it isn't a problem to get a different exposure.

With digital people tend to use the term "over exposure" to mean that the camera produced JPEG is too light, and "under exposure" to mean that the JPEG is too dark. Often this is incorrect. If the JPEG looks too dark, the exposure may have been fine, but the ISO was set too low.

The problem with using the term under/over exposure to refer to image lightness is that it can trick a beginner into thinking something was wrong with the exposure, when the real issue was that the ISO was wrong.

If you are using the aperture that gives you the desired depth of field, and the shutter that yields the desired motion blur, then your "exposure" is correct for your situation. If the image looks to dark or light, then your ISO setting was off.

Venger said:

Venger said:

Venger said:

I must say that I find myself in shutter priority mode the majority of the time because it’s mostly birds that I want to photograph, not always in flight it has to be said but more often flitting from branch to branch etc and this has led me to become slightly obsessed with my ISO values since I’m noticing that as the shutter speed increases, understandably, so does the ISO and as I want the sharpest picture, I’m acutely aware of higher ISO values producing grainier images.

Click to expand...

The FZ1000 evidently doesn’t handle the higher ISO settings very well. Some of your shutter speeds are unnecessarily fast.

Click to expand...

To be honest, seeing how far I could raise the shutter speed before higher ISO values made the image unpalatable for my taste was something of an experiment as earlier attempts always resulted in too much noise. Having taken the Buzzards with a shutter speed of 1/2000th and still retain a relatively low ISO value due to how bright the conditions were was a bit of a light bulb moment.

Click to expand...

The key to understanding noise is that it is not caused by a high ISO setting. Image noise is caused by a low exposure. The two are correlated as one usually uses a high ISO setting when you have a low exposure. Setting a high ISO when in an automatic mode directs the camera to choose a low exposure.

Technically, the noise is related to the total light captured. "Exposure" is the light captured per unit area. Multiply that by the size of the sensor and you get the total light captured.

A full frame sensor has four times the area of a 2X crop body. That's why the full frame gets two stops less noise at the same exposure.

If your subject lighting is fixed you can use aperture and shutter to control the total light captured. If you already have the largest aperture that yields sufficient depth of field, and the slowest shutter that doesn't give too much motion blur, then you are at your max exposure.

You can try adding more light to the subject (with something like a Better Beamer).

You can also try techniques to reduce motion blur. That will allow a longer shutter speed and more light captured.

For instance, you can pan the camera to follow a bird in flight. You can use a tripod with a gimbal head to allow you to smoothly follow the bird.

Try turning off any image stabilization. Some systems have trouble when you are panning, and might be trying to undo the pan.

Venger said:

I don't know what your go to shutter speeds would be for an insect that, at times, is moving so fast it's hard to see (altho admittedly they do hover for a fraction of a second now and again) but I started at 1/2000th as with the Buzzards and started increasing the speed whilst keeping an eye on the ISO. For my taste 1/5000th seemed the sweet spot as it captured much more detail than at 1/2000th and at 1/6400th I couldn't see much difference with 1/5000th plus the ISO had started to creep up.

Venger said:

Venger said:

...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If you have sufficient depth of field, open up the aperture a bit. If your lens is already wide open, you may benefit from a lens with a wider maximum aperture. This is where larger formats shine, they tend to offer the option of lenses with wider apertures. Unfortunately, these lenses can be expensive.

The rule is that with the same subject, angle of view, shutter speed, and aperture diameter, you get the same results independent of sensor size. By "same results" I mean same depth of field, same motion blur, same image noise, same diffraction issues, etc.

The aperture diameter is not the "f/stop". The "f/stop" is the relationship between the physical focal length and the aperture. For instance "f/4" means the aperture diameter is the focal length ("f") divided by 4. A 100mm lens at f/4 has a 25mm aperture diameter.

The a 50mm lens at f/2 on a 2X crop body will yield the same results as a 100mm lens at f/4 on a full frame.

One of the issues with crop bodies like the FZ1000 is that the maximum aperture diameter is rather small. This can be the limiting factor in how much light you can get in challenging situations.

The FZ1000 has a builtin zoom that's 9.1 to 146mm. Given the 2.7X crop body that yields a full frame equivalent of about 25 to 400mm. At f/4, the maximum aperture diameter at 400mm equivalent is 146mm/4 or 36.5mm. That will give you the same results as a full frame with a 400mm lens at f/11 (400/11 = 36.4).

So if you want to shoot birds, and you can get by with shallower depth of field, you may be better off with a larger sensor camera.

Venger said:

New Wrycuda said:

Venger said:

New Wrycuda said:

...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

So humouring me for a moment, for a static image like that, if you were to fix the ISO at 6400 for example, would the noise level remain the same regardless of whether your shutter speed is 1/100th or 1/2000th - does the shutter speed affect noise levels for a given ISO value?

Click to expand...

The noise is primarily dependent on the total light captured. If you reduce the light captured you will increase the noise.

If subject lighting and aperture remain the same, you will increase noise by using a shorter shutter speed.

Consider three shots at the same aperture and subject lighting.

#1 - shutter: 1/500, ISO 800

#2 - shutter: 1/1000 ISO 800

#3 - shutter: 1/1000, ISO 1600

Assume that image #1 results in a good looking camera produced JPEG.

Image #2 will look one stop darker, and be one stop noisier than #1.

Image #3 will have the same lightness as #1, but the same noise as #2.

If you take the raw file from #2, and process it to be one stop lighter, it will look identical to #3.

.

Noise is dependent on how much light is captured.

Image lightness is dependent on the relationship between exposure (light captured per unit area) and the ISO setting.

ISO influences the conversion of raw data to the JPEG. When you are shooting raw, the actual ISO value is determined by how you process the raw data.

Michael, once again, many thanks for such detailed replies, I have read them through several times.

This paragraph really stood out...

"With digital people tend to use the term "over exposure" to mean that the camera produced JPEG is too light, and "under exposure" to mean that the JPEG is too dark. Often this is incorrect. If the JPEG looks too dark, the exposure may have been fine, but the ISO was set too low."

I tend to think of 'exposure' as a combination of aperture, shutter speed and ISO and I would definitely fall into the category of people who, as you suggest, refer to over and under exposure as too light or too dark but it seems what I should be saying is that my aperture and shutter speed settings relate to 'exposure' (suitable DoF for my subject, suitable shutter speed to blur or stop motion) and then separately, talk about ISO in terms of how light or dark my captured image is - would that be correct?

Venger said:

Michael, once again, many thanks for such detailed replies, I have read them through several times.

This paragraph really stood out...

"With digital people tend to use the term "over exposure" to mean that the camera produced JPEG is too light, and "under exposure" to mean that the JPEG is too dark. Often this is incorrect. If the JPEG looks too dark, the exposure may have been fine, but the ISO was set too low."

I tend to think of 'exposure' as a combination of aperture, shutter speed and ISO and I would definitely fall into the category of people who, as you suggest, refer to over and under exposure as too light or too dark but it seems what I should be saying is that my aperture and shutter speed settings relate to 'exposure' (suitable DoF for my subject, suitable shutter speed to blur or stop motion) and then separately, talk about ISO in terms of how light or dark my captured image is - would that be correct?

Click to expand...

Yes, it can be confusing as "exposure" is often misused.

Consider two captures of the same subject. Both are at f/8, and both are at 1/60. On one the camera is set to ISO 100, and on the other the camera is set to ISO 400. Both captures are at the same "exposure" (light per unit area on the sensor), but the resulting camera-produced JPEGs will have different lightness.

Venger said:

New Wrycuda said:

I often allow ISO to range up to 6400 without particular concern...

Click to expand...

So humouring me for a moment, for a static image like that, if you were to fix the ISO at 6400 for example, would the noise level remain the same regardless of whether your shutter speed is 1/100th or 1/2000th - does the shutter speed affect noise levels for a given ISO value?

Click to expand...

If I manually set the ISO to 6400, and with a shutter speed of 1/2000, there would not be enough light to get a good exposure, since the aperture is already at f/5 and the lens has a maximum aperture of f/4. BTW, that photo of the cat was just a random shot indoors as I was preparing the camera for a field trip.

No, the shutter speed does not directly affect noise, it’s the amount of light. People tend to say “Noisy due to high ISO”, but it’s actually the effect of the low exposure that high ISO allows. Some people are rather pedantic on this matter.

The key thing to know is that ISO is not part of exposure, although some people tend to think that it is. There’s also the nonsense of the “exposure triangle” which reinforces the misinformation. You can, however use a rather simple linear equation to calculate the “Lightness” of the final photo, given aperture, SS and ISO. By default, many cameras display the “Lightness corrected” image when reviewing shots on the rear screen or EVF.

When I bought my first SLR about 50 years ago, a friend gave me a 10-second lesson on the settings, and I was good to go. Back then, film speed (64, 100, 400) was the only other choice. When moving to digital cameras, it was an easy transition, with variable ISO coming into play, mostly as a “safety net”.

Trivial exercise? Maybe, but I did have advanced knowledge of optics and mathematics. ;-)

I think you are well on the track to understanding and just mainly need to keep learning and practicing. If you want to go to the next level you really need to consider moving to a lager sensor. I use APS-C or in Nikon terms DX. You will find that the acceptable iso level for use going from your 1" sensor to aps-c will be very large. I am perfectly happy with results from iso 1600 or 3200 with DX that compare easily with iso 400 or maybe 800 with 1" sensor. And can feel comfortable with using. 6400 as my max for normal uses. That is where you will see the biggest difference between larger sensors like DX and FF over your Panasonic. I mostly use a 28-400mm lens which is 42-600mm in FF equivalence, but has a max aperture of f8 at longer focal length. So this keeps me operating at least at 1600 iso most of the time and more in low light, but this does not bother me with the DX sensor. I also have 1" sensor cameras and even smaller sensors, but anything over 400 iso is kinda touch and go as far as being happy with the resulting image quality.

Venger said:

Michael, once again, many thanks for such detailed replies, I have read them through several times.

This paragraph really stood out...

"With digital people tend to use the term "over exposure" to mean that the camera produced JPEG is too light, and "under exposure" to mean that the JPEG is too dark. Often this is incorrect. If the JPEG looks too dark, the exposure may have been fine, but the ISO was set too low."

I tend to think of 'exposure' as a combination of aperture, shutter speed and ISO and I would definitely fall into the category of people who, as you suggest, refer to over and under exposure as too light or too dark but it seems what I should be saying is that my aperture and shutter speed settings relate to 'exposure' (suitable DoF for my subject, suitable shutter speed to blur or stop motion) and then separately, talk about ISO in terms of how light or dark my captured image is - would that be correct?

Click to expand...

Exposure is the amount of light captured per unit area on the sensor. The term is often used incorrectly or questionably. It's not really the lightness or darkness of the print. Don't get up in the culture wars of this. It will just waste your time. If in doubt, just read the Wikipedia article on exposure (photography) and move on. You probably only need the first sentence or first paragraph.

Since you seem to be a little bit dissatisfied, let me explain the photographic facts of life. Assuming you have adequate depth of field, it's focused well, and you've captured motion well enough, and you have enough pixels on the subject, the image quality depends almost entirely on the number of photons that you capture from the subject -- in other words, the number of photons per duck.

Photons are like little dots that make up your image. The more dots, the better the image. (Kibitzers, please refrain from messing up this simple analogy. It's not necessary, and we don't want to overwhelm the thread with needless detail and controversy.)

Low exposure means not many photons, and as you know, the images are not as good. You can increase the photons per duck with a longer lens, because the image is larger, ergo, more photons. As a rule of thumb, you can just glance at the front of the lens and know how much light (i.e., how many photons) the lens is going to capture from the subject. You can see the aperture (aka entrance pupil). The bigger the aperture, the more light you can grab. It is literally that simple.

How do you get a bigger aperture? Well, cameras with bigger sensors need longer lenses, and longer lenses tend to have bigger apertures. In other words, as a generality, big lenses and cameras with big sensors can grab more light. Of course, the f stop and focal length play a role too. As already mentioned, a longer lens can have a larger aperture. Still, it's generally harder to capture much light with a small lens and a small sensor. Your camera has quite a small sensor.

Sorry. And unfortunately, with wildlife photography the sky is the limit.

Nice pictures, though. To tell you the truth, even with larger cameras, bright sunshine makes it easier to capture detail, and dark shade is almost always difficult. So you have done quite well, in my opinion.

Venger said:

Hi,

About 4 years ago I posted on the forum for the first time.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4557524

I’d recently upgraded from an ancient Samsung S6 smartphone to a brand new S21 and having used the S6 extensively to take wildlife shots in the garden of birds, bugs and blooms, I was ready to have my mind blown with the improvement in the camera quality of the S21…I was distinctly underwhelmed!

Anyway, this led me to consider purchasing my first ‘proper camera’ since it was pointed out to me that the quality I was wanting/expecting from my photos might simply not be possible from a smartphone, even a very good one. Folk here were incredibly generous with their knowledge, opinions and suggestions and I ended up buying a second hand Panasonic FZ1000 mk1 since I wanted to keep things relatively portable and avoid having to carry several lenses.

As a first time camera I think it’s undoubtedly been the right choice for me, it’s taught me a huge amount about the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO but I will also say that I’ve come to realise it’s limitations in trying to achieve the type of shots I see in all the birdwatching magazines and the plethora of pro/semi-pro photographers who post on social media.

I went into the purchase with my eyes open, I knew it was going to be an incredibly steep learning curve and that has proved to be the case - it can still frustrate and reward in equal measure. In the first couple of years I didn’t use it anywhere near as much as I should and I also ended up getting very bogged down in reading about ‘how’ to take photographs rather than just going out and taking photographs whilst learning from my mistakes.

Soon after getting the camera I read Graham Houghton’s extensive user manual/book which went a little over my head at times tbh and last year I read Stephen Ingraham’s book ‘Point and Shoot Nature Photography’ which I dare say would send cold chills down the backs of professional wildlife cameramen and women but it did resonate with me a bit and left me telling myself, get out there, take some pictures and get some real world experience of how different settings affect the captured image.

I said this in my post 4 years ago and I repeat it now, I’m very much aware of the skill of the photographer who’s learnt their trade, learnt the theory, learnt how to use their equipment in order to get the very best image they can, it’s a lot more than just having an expensive camera and lens and I respect and admire them immensely.

In his book, Stephen Ingraham suggests making use of the program mode on the camera, mixed with using shutter priority for those situations that demand it such as birds in flight etc and this is something I’ve tried to adopt.

I must say that I find myself in shutter priority mode the majority of the time because it’s mostly birds that I want to photograph, not always in flight it has to be said but more often flitting from branch to branch etc and this has led me to become slightly obsessed with my ISO values since I’m noticing that as the shutter speed increases, understandably, so does the ISO and as I want the sharpest picture, I’m acutely aware of higher ISO values producing grainier images.

What I’ve come to realise is the huge difference shooting on a super bright day can have and I appreciate all the seasoned photographers out there will probably be rolling their eyes at that comment!

I was watching Common Buzzards the other day on a beautiful sunny morning, not a cloud in the sky and with them bathed in sunlight, even with a shutter speed of 1/2000th, my ISO (on auto setting) was as low as 250.

This made me want to push shutter speeds even more and on another equally bright day, I was shooting a Dark Edged Bee-Fly in my garden at 1/5000th and the ISO (again on auto) was only 320 which I thought was incredible at such a fast shutter speed!

However, the downside to this obsession with speed vs ISO is that if I’m now shooting a bird in a bush or tree where the light level is lower and the ISO is hitting around 1000 or above, I tend not to bother because I cannot seem to get the image sharp enough for my taste. If the bird is not moving too fast I’ll try and swap over to program mode and take a few shots (which is what happened with the Chiffchaff photo) and see how they come out – if the camera is selecting a relatively fast shutter speed I can sometimes get lucky with a decent shot with a lower ISO.

What’s the point of this incredibly long ramble I hear you ask, well I don’t really know tbh lol, I kind of wanted to say I did at least follow through with my desire to buy a camera, I would be happy for some critique on the photo’s posted below if that’s ok with forum rules and I’d also like your take on shutter speed vs ISO, are you happy to still take shots if the ISO is heading well north of 1000? Does better equipment produce better results at higher ISO values?

I should say that I’m only shooting in JPEG as I have no means to manipulate RAW files, nor own a computer that will run any of the clever post production software like Lightroom or Photoshop, altho perhaps I may consider looking for a second hand Mac or PC in order to dip my toe in post production waters in due course.

For now I’ll press on with the FZ1000 but I must say I rather like the look of the Nikon Z8 and Sigma 150-600mm Sports lens but that's lottery dream stuff ;-)

Thanks for reading this far and for getting me to this point with my camera.

Nick

Click to expand...

Congratulations, Nick! You got a real camera and you are taking some nice photos. Hope you are enjoying it I read some of the replies and I agree with the folks that say you should switch to Manual with auto ISO. Being able to control your aperture will help get the results you want. I wouldn't get too caught up on what the perfect definition of "exposure" is or isn't. If your photo is too dark because your ISO was too low, or all blown out and ruined because your ISO was too high, it doesn't really matter what you call it, you may end up with an unusable image. And after all, a lot of people call it the exposure triangle for a reason. Setting the aperture yourself will allow you to control the depth of field even in sunny days and put you in control of the tradeoffs between the three: ISO, shutter speed and aperture.

Like someone else said, at first it might seem really complex, but with practice you will realize there is very little to it. The key is practice. Instead of reading another book, just take photos, lots of them. Make mistakes and learn from them, or try an inexpensive workshop that will get you up to speed with Manual mode.

Instead of getting a Z8, get a used D7500 or a D500 or a D750 and spend the money saved on a photography vacation (In my humble opinion, even today, there is no better birding camera than a D500).

But the one bit of advice that I really want to give you is this: break the rules. If you google the right shutter speed for bird photography you get around 1/800th to 1/4000th. Try shooting at 1/50th of a second and pan the camera with the bird, or a 10th of a second, shoot a landscape photo at f/2.8, place the subject in the "wrong" place. Places like DPReview are filled with "perfectly" taken but super boring photos. Break the rules and make some art!

Venger said:

What’s the point of this incredibly long ramble I hear you ask, well I don’t really know tbh lol, I kind of wanted to say I did at least follow through with my desire to buy a camera, I would be happy for some critique on the photo’s posted below if that’s ok with forum rules

Click to expand...

The first two photos show good instincts. You've positioned the lens at the level of your subjects and framed them within their environment. Being at "eye level" with a subject invites a more intimate, one-on-one connection. Placing the subject within an environment gives a sense of place and has the potential to make the photo a compelling story.

Venger said:

and I’d also like your take on shutter speed vs ISO, are you happy to still take shots if the ISO is heading well north of 1000? Does better equipment produce better results at higher ISO values?

Click to expand...

One of the benefits of embracing the truth that f-stop and shutter speed are the camera settings determining exposure and that the total light energy used to make a photo determines how visible noise will be, is that ISO stops being a monster to hide from.

This is especially true for wildlife and bird photography, genres practiced by photographers shooting everything from bridge cameras to medium format and for wich the ISO used isn't a reliable indicator of the quality of the image.

ISO is the setting we use to manage image lightness. That's it. The aperture and exposure time used are the key settings:

If you use the widest aperture (smallest f-number) that delivers an adequate depth of field and the longest exposure time (slowest shutter speed) that acceptably renders movement without blowing out highlights, you'll optimize exposure within your creative goals for the photo.

Select an ISO that results in a pleasing image lightness and you're all set.

Of course, it's your knowledge of the subject and ability to place yourself in a favorable position from which to make a photo that will have the greatest impact on your images. That comes with reps so, keep getting out there to make photos with whatever gear is on your bag.

Venger said:

I should say that I’m only shooting in JPEG as I have no means to manipulate RAW files, nor own a computer that will run any of the clever post production software like Lightroom or Photoshop, altho perhaps I may consider looking for a second hand Mac or PC in order to dip my toe in post production waters in due course.

Click to expand...

Among the benefits of processing your photos is that image lightness is easily adjusted in post. ISO is just one of several tools at your disposal. Lightness adjustments in post work equally as well and come with no noise penalty.

Not only is ISO not an exposure setting; its also not a source of noise.

Venger said:

For now I’ll press on with the FZ1000 but I must say I rather like the look of the Nikon Z8 and Sigma 150-600mm Sports lens but that's lottery dream stuff ;-)

Thanks for reading this far and for getting me to this point with my camera.

Click to expand...

Good luck and please continue to share your photos.

Venger said:

Nick

Click to expand...

--
Bill Ferris Photography
Flagstaff, AZ

Bob, Thrilla, Chelsea, Bill, many, many thanks for the continued replies, I've read through them all, several times and I do appreciate people taking the time to offer their experiences and opinions and also encouragement.

I do identify with the sentiment in your post Chelsea, I'm a guitarist of 45+ years but never learnt to read music. There is of course a time and a place for that, however, because I don't know what the 'rules' are I'm not limited to thinking I can't play that note with that chord etc. etc. and it's quite freeing but more importantly incredibly creative - you just follow your nose, or ear in my case - and surely creativity is the key here.

I don't say that in a disrespectful way to professional musicians or photographers alike, it's also, imho, not laziness on my part, I've worked very, very hard over the years to learn and improve my playing, at times putting in hours and hours of practise, it's just that I would rather be playing and discovering sounds etc instead of learning what the black dots mean but I reiterate...each to their own.

Probably the one thing that stands out from the responses to my post is that I really need to investigate the possibility of getting a camera with a larger sensor...and then experiment more in manual mode.

Have a great Easter weekend and I hope the weather is good wherever you are in the world!

Venger said:

… I would rather be playing and discovering sounds etc instead of learning what the black dots mean but I reiterate... each to their own.

Click to expand...

I’d encourage you to learn what the “black dots” are all about. Even if the guitar is mostly chord-based, those dots are elementary. Pianists, for example, need to know the dots from day one, and it’s really easy, but not as easy as learning about exposure. :-D

Venger said:

Probably the one thing that stands out from the responses to my post is that I really need to investigate the possibility of getting a camera with a larger sensor...and then experiment more in manual mode.

Click to expand...

Manual mode is not a photographic panacea, but can be handy in special circumstances. This forum is replete with beginners who are addicted to manual mode and who generally achieve nothing.

I once sold an inexpensive camera to a guy who rejected it because there was no manual mode. He ended up with a Canon DSLR that he used exclusively in manual mode, with singular lack of success.

I have a suspicion that this reply won't elevate me to the "Thanks List".




Example from $50 camera.

Venger said:

Bob, Thrilla, Chelsea, Bill, many, many thanks for the continued replies, I've read through them all, several times and I do appreciate people taking the time to offer their experiences and opinions and also encouragement.

I do identify with the sentiment in your post Chelsea, I'm a guitarist of 45+ years but never learnt to read music. There is of course a time and a place for that, however, because I don't know what the 'rules' are I'm not limited to thinking I can't play that note with that chord etc. etc. and it's quite freeing but more importantly incredibly creative - you just follow your nose, or ear in my case - and surely creativity is the key here.

I don't say that in a disrespectful way to professional musicians or photographers alike, it's also, imho, not laziness on my part, I've worked very, very hard over the years to learn and improve my playing, at times putting in hours and hours of practise, it's just that I would rather be playing and discovering sounds etc instead of learning what the black dots mean but I reiterate...each to their own.

Probably the one thing that stands out from the responses to my post is that I really need to investigate the possibility of getting a camera with a larger sensor...and then experiment more in manual mode.

Have a great Easter weekend and I hope the weather is good wherever you are in the world!

Click to expand...

You are on the path, Nick, and I think you know it! Keep on following your ear, your eye, your curiosity. Someone once said: my best photos are the mistakes of my mistakes. Keep on playing and keep on having fun!

ChelseaPhotographer said:

Venger said:

Bob, Thrilla, Chelsea, Bill, many, many thanks for the continued replies, I've read through them all, several times and I do appreciate people taking the time to offer their experiences and opinions and also encouragement.

I do identify with the sentiment in your post Chelsea, I'm a guitarist of 45+ years but never learnt to read music. There is of course a time and a place for that, however, because I don't know what the 'rules' are I'm not limited to thinking I can't play that note with that chord etc. etc. and it's quite freeing but more importantly incredibly creative - you just follow your nose, or ear in my case - and surely creativity is the key here.

I don't say that in a disrespectful way to professional musicians or photographers alike, it's also, imho, not laziness on my part, I've worked very, very hard over the years to learn and improve my playing, at times putting in hours and hours of practise, it's just that I would rather be playing and discovering sounds etc instead of learning what the black dots mean but I reiterate...each to their own.

Probably the one thing that stands out from the responses to my post is that I really need to investigate the possibility of getting a camera with a larger sensor...and then experiment more in manual mode.

Have a great Easter weekend and I hope the weather is good wherever you are in the world!

Click to expand...

You are on the path, Nick, and I think you know it! Keep on following your ear, your eye, your curiosity. Someone once said: my best photos are the mistakes of my mistakes. Keep on playing and keep on having fun!

Click to expand...

I prefer a more formal approach to photography, and I still have a lot of fun.

Besides the basics of “exposure”, there’s many technical aspects of camera operation that facilitate getting good and reliable results, with the emphasis on reliable rather than random.

User Memories, for example can be very helpful in getting the settings right for a variety of scenarios, while some cameras have “Superior Auto” modes that analyse the scene and alter the parameters as required. There’s a host of other settings that are worth investigating.

I toured Europe a few years ago using my Sony a6000 and used my “Landscape” and “Sports” memory settings with considerable success, sometimes with a little EC. Another member of the tour group used a Canon DSLR in manual mode, regularly ratcheting the dials in a seemingly random manner. She actually approached me to offer some help with my camera, because it appeared that I wasn’t using it properly!