Photo sharing: High ISO

[bob100]

i never go above 1600 on my D7000. Call it old school. Thats why i invested in 1.4 lenses.

like others have indicated, use Photoshop and noise reduction filters and it opens up a lot more possibilities with higher ISO levels and large aperture primes


60D using Photoshop and Neat Image filter
ISO 3200

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

ISO 12800


Hm5 by Terry McGraw Photography, on Flickr

 

[photo_chick]

i never go above 1600 on my D7000. Call it old school. Thats why i invested in 1.4 lenses.

Sometimes even with a fast lens you have to use a high ISO setting to get the shot. Which really just blows my mind a little bit because these are shots that we'd never have been able to get with film. It simply wasn't fast enough. Like when I was night diving. I was using a 50mm f/1.8 wide open that night and I still bumped the ISO way up.

 

[havoc315]

Sometimes even with a fast lens you have to use a high ISO setting to get the shot. Which really just blows my mind a little bit because these are shots that we'd never have been able to get with film. It simply wasn't fast enough. Like when I was night diving. I was using a 50mm f/1.8 wide open that night and I still bumped the ISO way up.

In film days, I don't think I ever shot with faster than ISO 800. I usually purchased ISO 400. And of course, once you loaded the film, couldn't change ISO between shots.

It all adds up, to being able to use those fast lenses to get shots and quality that were impossible before.
Or using slower lenses at higher ISO, that used to require fast professional lenses.

 

[zackiedawg]

One of the coolest things about digital technology and how its expanding is that you are no longer limited to a film speed of maybe ISO800, and having to stop when you've reached the handholding limits of an F1.4 lens. Notice that with many of these high ISO samples you see, these ARE being shot with F1.4 to F1.8 fast primes, WIDE OPEN! And some are only achieving shutter speeds of 1/20 - 1/40 handheld, showing what both a super-high ISO and image-stabilization can do to expand our photographic capabilities into areas never before dreamed of in film days.

Here are some of mine, with a few different cameras and lenses:

Old school - manual focus, 35mm F1.4 lens wide open on my NEX-5N, ISO6400, no stabilization, 1/80 shutter speed:

NEX-5N, ISO6400, F4 lens wide open, handheld:

NEX-5N ISO12800:

A580, ISO6400:

A580, ISO12800, F1.4:

This was pushing it, mostly just for fun to see how the camera performed - my NEX-5N at ISO25,600, then stacked and screened for ISO51,200 equivalent:

NEX-5N, ISo12800:

 

[havoc315]

ISO 6400


untitled-44.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

ISO 6400 jpeg with additional run through Topaz DeNoise


untitled-22-2-Edit.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

ISO 25,600 --- Multi Frame Noise Reduction :


untitled-19.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

[traylorc]

ISO 10,000...utilized noise reduction in LR:


The Bride From The Haunted Mansion by Tom Traylor, on Flickr

 

[havoc315]

Iso 5000.


untitled-19.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

[sporadic]

I never push it into the expanded modes, but have no problems shooting max ISO on my 7D @ 6400. Lightroom does a decent job cleaning it up. These are both ISO6400 with a Tokina 11-16. Full EXIF in the Flickr links.

 

[havoc315]

An ISO 6400 portrait, on the most amazing lens I've ever owned:

 

[Pixel Dust]

All on the D600. I usually try to keep the ISO as low a possible but, even with f/1.4 glass, there are times when 6400 or higher is required.

ISO 6400, 1/60, f/1.4, boosted in post


ISO 6400, 1/15, f/2.8, boosted in post

ISO 6400, 1/15, f/2.8

 

[havoc315]

dance-107.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

[zackiedawg]

Does make one thing perfectly clear - and that should stop all the silly my-brand-is-better threads...ALL cameras today are pretty spectacular performers and really have moved photography up a few notches, no matter which one you buy. Far cry not only from film days, but even large-sensor digital 6-8 years ago!

 

[havoc315]

Does make one thing perfectly clear - and that should stop all the silly my-brand-is-better threads...ALL cameras today are pretty spectacular performers and really have moved photography up a few notches, no matter which one you buy. Far cry not only from film days, but even large-sensor digital 6-8 years ago!

Different brands still have slightly different strengths or weaknesses.... but yes, very clearly there is no brand that is a knock-down best and winner.
And in terms of high ISO, they all blow out film cameras and early generation dSLRs.

I'd have serious trouble re-adjusting to film if I went back. And I was still using a film SLR just about 9 years ago. Really totally needing a flash for anything indoors. Impossible to realize the faster shutter speeds I sometimes use now.

Not only has low light performance improved so much since film, but the convenience of changing ISO from shot to shot is also a nice convenience compared to film days. (When ISO was dictated by the film). Back then, I almost always shot with ISO 400 film to get faster shutter speeds. It's hard for me to imagine being limited to ISO 400 now. Even just 3 years ago, I was still shooting with a fairly early dSLR, the A100... and it was pretty much limited to ISO 400 and lower.

 

[havoc315]

ISO 8000. Just a bit of lightroom noise reduction.

dance-113.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

[Pixel Dust]

Not only has low light performance improved so much since film, but the convenience of changing ISO from shot to shot is also a nice convenience compared to film days. (When ISO was dictated by the film). Back then, I almost always shot with ISO 400 film to get faster shutter speeds. It's hard for me to imagine being limited to ISO 400 now. Even just 3 years ago, I was still shooting with a fairly early dSLR, the A100... and it was pretty much limited to ISO 400 and lower.

That Kodak ISO 800 film was so horrible. Insane amounts of grain!

 

[havoc315]

That Kodak ISO 800 film was so horrible. Insane amounts of grain!

It's been so long since I bought film, my memories are pretty vague. And I was a far less knowledgeable photographer back then. All I knew was that higher ISO film meant faster shutter speeds. (I didn't actually even understand the interplay of aperture all that way back then).
My vague memory was that I was pretty happy with ISO 400, and ISO 800 started getting too expensive.
I don't remember the prices or anything, just remember that 800 was much more than 400.

Which is another huge thing that would make it hard to go back to film. Now, I can shoot 200+ shots in a day and then only use the good ones.
No way I would do that in film days... too much film, too much developing. At most, on a vacation, I might have shot 2 rolls in a day. More likely, no more than one roll per day.
Of course, there is something to be said for carefully trying to nail the shot the first time. Instead of chimping, and taking the same shot 20 times.

 

[HPS3]

Justin, you are so right! All of these new DSLR's and MILC's are so good at higher ISO's. I shot some 800 film through my Minolta SRT102 not too long ago. I remember comparing RAW files at 6400 from the A7 and Fuji XE2 and just couldn't justify the difference in price for the A7 and lenses unless you needed razor thin DOF.

6D ISO 8000 with pretty much just a WB adjustment. I think the NR slider in LR was at 5 so this is pretty much OOC noise in RAW.

Waiting by Harry Shields, on Flickr

 

[Hockeyman]

ISO 8000

Tell the boys we sails with the tide by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr

 

[HPS3]

Fuji X-E2 and 55-200 at ISO 6400. This was shot in RAW and cropped and converted to Jpeg in LR. The NR slider was on 5 so pretty much SOOC. There is plenty of detail here for high ISO.

Beautiful Hawk by Harry Shields, on Flickr