ISO vs shutter speed

[MarshallG]

My take on this overly philosophical argument on the beginner forum....

Maybe it would be interesting to figure out what ISO actually does in full manual or automatic modes (including auto ISO). The only thing I can see is that the camera uses the ISO to configure the post capture downstream processing to result in an ISO compliant JPG tonality. It is completely passive!

If using an auto exposure, aperture or shutter, you fix the system to exactly one Exposure as determined by the light meter system.

 

[Bob A L]

It seems like there are folks on these digital forums that never did much film photography. Nothing wrong with that, but just that it occasionally shows in responses that indicate they are responding with something they read rather than experienced.

 

[Bill Ferris]

“Try to keep the ISO as low as possible” is pretty much all you need in order to begin. Jumping from there to 3D chess and back to “try to keep the ISO as low as possible” is going to cause more confusion. For someone new to an advanced camera, introducing shutter, aperture, ISO, focus and zoom is already overload.

My recommendation is to keep exposure as high as possible within your creative vision for the photo. Light is, after all, the key to photograhy.

 

[Bill Ferris]

I'd say that's a much better answer for a beginners questions forum. If I were a beginner and had the long drawn out multi tech theory of operation thrown at me, I'd probably end my thoughts of taking up the hobby immediately and keep using my cell phone.

EXACTLY ... 100% RIGHT

It can be especially confusing to suggest that increasing ISO results in lower noise.

That's probably a good thing since the reason folks would be confused by that statement is that it conflicts with the ISO myth perpetuated by the exposure triangle. That confusion is a first step in the direction of having a basic understanding of how cameras actually work.

This may be true w/ some cameras at some specific ISO's, but in general INCREASING ISO WILL (indirectly) RESULT in HIGHER noise, (albeit due to lower exposure -- but a beginner can learn that TOMORROW, not necessarily "today").

If the myth is reinforced today, it becomes harder to unlearn down the road. An accurate but simple description would be to say that, in an auto exposure mode, a change to ISO can lead to the camera making changes to exposure (f-stop or shutter speed) to keep image lightness the same.

 

[MarshallG]

It seems like there are folks on these digital forums that never did much film photography. Nothing wrong with that, but just that it occasionally shows in responses that indicate they are responding with something they read rather than experienced.

I often notice that when I describe how I use something based on experience, someone retorts with a very lengthy technical response… and those people rarely have posted any photos they’ve taken. They seem disconnected from how to apply the technology.

 

[tony field]

1. MarshallG wrote:

It seems like there are folks on these digital forums that never did much film photography. Nothing wrong with that, but just that it occasionally shows in responses that indicate they are responding with something they read rather than experienced.

I often notice that when I describe how I use something based on experience, someone retorts with a very lengthy technical response… and those people rarely have posted any photos they’ve taken. They seem disconnected from how to apply the technology.

Oftentimes the long winded dissertations are motivated by technically incorrect postings related to the application of the technology. Misinformation, mere speculation and poor interpretation, by some, are considered to be a mortal sin on this forum. As far as I am concerned, it is simply part of the dpreview entertainment !

--
Charles Darwin: "ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
tony

 

[Bob A L]

It can certainly be entertaining at times.

 

[MarshallG]

1. MarshallG wrote:

It seems like there are folks on these digital forums that never did much film photography. Nothing wrong with that, but just that it occasionally shows in responses that indicate they are responding with something they read rather than experienced.

I often notice that when I describe how I use something based on experience, someone retorts with a very lengthy technical response… and those people rarely have posted any photos they’ve taken. They seem disconnected from how to apply the technology.

Oftentimes the long winded dissertations are motivated by technically incorrect postings related to the application of the technology. Misinformation, mere speculation and poor interpretation, by some, are considered to be a mortal sin on this forum. As far as I am concerned, it is simply part of the dpreview entertainment !

 

[tony field]

1. MarshallG wrote:

It seems like there are folks on these digital forums that never did much film photography. Nothing wrong with that, but just that it occasionally shows in responses that indicate they are responding with something they read rather than experienced.

I often notice that when I describe how I use something based on experience, someone retorts with a very lengthy technical response… and those people rarely have posted any photos they’ve taken. They seem disconnected from how to apply the technology.

Oftentimes the long winded dissertations are motivated by technically incorrect postings related to the application of the technology. Misinformation, mere speculation and poor interpretation, by some, are considered to be a mortal sin on this forum. As far as I am concerned, it is simply part of the dpreview entertainment !

I know a guy who went for his orals for a physics phd, and the professors said they only had one question: “Why is the sky blue?” He answered the question, and their requests for clarifications went on for about three hours, but he got his phd. You can make anything as complicated as you want.

On the subject of ISO, understanding what it is and how it works is not especially valuable, compared to taking photographs and studying the results. Assuming you choose a good level of “lightness” (Heaven forbid the Nazis see me use any other equally good word!), the effect of the ISO setting has very very little to do with the intellectual nonsense and everything to do with the nature of the subject lighting and the sensor you’re using.

If someone is not writing about these things from the perspective of taking photographs or what the photo will look like, they don’t know what they’re talking about. Or, at least, they are not providing usable information.

Many of the long winded posters are both technically correct and good photographers. Just look at their dpreview galleries or web page. It is a shame that illustrative images are not part of the discussion.

I have found that illustrative images are seldom appreciated.

--
Charles Darwin: "ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
tony

 

[MarshallG]

Many of the long winded posters are both technically correct and good photographers. Just look at their dpreview galleries or web page. It is a shame that illustrative images are not part of the discussion.

I don’t want to point any “Fingers” (hint hint) but some have no photos in their galleries at all