X-T5 at 12,800 ISO

I have often read that the X-T5 must be used at a maximum of ISO 3,200. In this photo - and in others - I did not pay attention to this precept and, accomplice, I shot out in difficult light and in uncomfortable positions (I was lying on the ground, on the floor of the house, with little light), I went far beyond. This, for example, was done at ISO 12,800.
I know, the noise is clearly visible, but in my opinion in the context of the image it is not at all annoying, indeed it gives the photo a "printing on rough paper" effect that I find pleasant. What do you think?

Agreed. I find the noise argument a little tiring these days. On a global level noise just shouldn’t be an issue any more - unless perhaps for fine art photography or some such. I often shoot my sports stuff at 6400 and the images are excellent. 
I find noise only becomes an issue when you have to crop into a high ISO image so it’s something to bear in mind, but at full resolution it just isn’t an issue in the modern day. 
And to echo what you eluded to, as noise goes, I quite like Fuji’s rendering - it gives that sort of vintage grain look.

and if reducing the noise is important expose to the right ETTR with +2/3 to 1 EV then in PP adjust highlights.

This means little of course but having spent a bit of time on old slides the noise on that looks comparable with Kodachrome 200 a full six stops.

I sometimes think people have different tolerances/preferences regarding noise. Like you, I don't mind some noise in high ISO shots. Often it gives character to the image.

And like another poster said: compared to slides I used to shoot decades ago, todays camera's have very little noise. I recently looked at some Kodachrome slides and was surprised how noisy they were, which I didn't find a problem back then.

baobob wrote:

and if reducing the noise is important expose to the right ETTR with +2/3 to 1 EV then in PP adjust highlights.

Actually, as Fuji sensors are quite ISO invariant in that range, so long as you are maximizing the sensor exposure, it doesn’t much matter where you set the ISO beyond 1600 or so. You can shoot at -3EV (ISO 1600 instead of 12800) and just push the brightness where it needs to go in post - no significant noise penalty, and you get significantly more highlight headroom to work with. ETTR is really only relevant at base ISO.

I’ve never had a problem shooting any of my Fujis at their Raw-support max ISO, but what I usually try to do is manually shoot lower and push in post.

Your cat doesn't seem to agree with you, I hear his menacing sound 

👍🏻

lexvo wrote:

I sometimes think people have different tolerances/preferences regarding noise. Like you, I don't mind some noise in high ISO shots. Often it gives character to the image.

Exactly.  However, I guess it depends on what type of photography you do.  I honestly do not care about noise until it gets really ugly and discolored.  Some people cannot handle just a little.

If it was so dark you had to use high iso then it’s  moot point, but if you can take pics at iso 100, 3200, 12800 and then ask which one is preferred it’ll unlikely be the latter

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

baobob wrote:

and if reducing the noise is important expose to the right ETTR with +2/3 to 1 EV then in PP adjust highlights.

Actually, as Fuji sensors are quite ISO invariant in that range, so long as you are maximizing the sensor exposure, it doesn’t much matter where you set the ISO beyond 1600 or so. You can shoot at -3EV (ISO 1600 instead of 12800) and just push the brightness where it needs to go in post - no significant noise penalty, and you get significantly more highlight headroom to work with. ETTR is really only relevant at base ISO.

Agreed about everything here other than the last sentence. This week I got an opportunity to shoot at a club where the lighting has been pretty much the same as it had been for the past decade (very dark) and so got to do some good comparisons going back not only to the X-T2/20 shots, but earlier Pentax shots (on the 24mp sensor).

To the extent that I had "maximized sensor exposure" correctly, the ultimate processing in the 2000 to 6400 range from the X-T5 showed less noise and equal or slightly better sharpness. Of course, that involved a bit less sharpening and more NR than with the older sensor. A few times the sensor got tricked and lowered the ISO too far (yes, I use auto ISO in these variable light situations) - and the lack of maximized exposure resulted in slightly greater noise issues than with the old sensor. So, proper exposure is more critical with the 40mp sensor - as there seems to be more of a distinct shadow cliff.

It is likely that Erik and I have somewhat different understandings of ETTR... but to me it really does mean "maximizing the sensor exposure" and that should include low-light situations when you aren't filling the well.

People who complain about noise at Fuji 12800 ISO never worked with HP5 film. That one had grain like bullets, and then I liked to push it to 800ISO which made it worse. Still, I made the only photo I ever sold this way so if the subject is right, who cares?

Agreed with everyone, 12,800 can be totally fine in many scenarios. I've also been floored by what can be done with 12,800 and DXO PL5/6. I don't make an effort to shoot that high, but I don't completely avoid it either. The ISO 3200 shot you never took because it was too dark will always be worse than the 12,800 shot you did take!

PeterLeyssens wrote:

People who complain about noise at Fuji 12800 ISO never worked with HP5 film. That one had grain like bullets, and then I liked to push it to 800ISO which made it worse. Still, I made the only photo I ever sold this way so if the subject is right, who cares?

Or Ilford 3200! That said, film grain looks a little nicer than noise typically, but yes, we are spoiled these days thinking 3200-12800 should be noiseless.

"film grain looks a little nicer than noise"

I think that is just nostalgia!

a_c_skinner wrote:

"film grain looks a little nicer than noise"

I think that is just nostalgia!

No it really isn’t… I actually prefer digital for color photography.

Well this is not my experience Indoors at ISO 1600, in some shots I get say too much noise Exposing in ETTR at +2/3 to 1 EV gives much better results i tyerms of noise because I get a stronger signal thus a better SNR.

John Gellings wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

"film grain looks a little nicer than noise"

I think that is just nostalgia!

No it really isn’t… I actually prefer digital for color photography.

Doesn't it really come down to the particular film, the type of developer used, the extent of push processing, not to mention the even-greater variables involved in working with digital processing?

You really have a great deal more latitude on the digital side because the type of grain can be selected (six very different formulations in Capture One alone), and highly variable inputs relating to intensity and granularity. Most importantly, with film you're relying on a chemical process that doesn't give you do-over ability (as far as I recall).

I'm not saying that digital grain is "better," but certainly we have greater control to get the best possible result to our particular liking. If more of us used the option more regularly (using quality inputs), we might collectively have a greater affection for it.

Agree

Maximising exposure sensor = what exactly ?? What I do with the XH2 in dim light is having EV +2/3 to 1. Is it ETTR or maximization of sensor exposure ??

OTH I am not sure as well that the 40 mpx sensor is as ISO invariant as the 26 mpx is ??