Save 50% On Affinity Photo Today!

High ISO


StrayCat 16 19.1k 3 Canada
15 Feb 2017 5:44PM
I see it in reviews of cameras quite often in the pros and cons, sometimes even on compact cameras, the fact that the ISO only goes to 25400, or some such number. As if you may not want to purchase this camera for that reason. When was the last time you used an ISO that high? I just read a review of the new Olympus E-M1 IIand the limit of 25400 is listed as a con. It's a M4/3 sensor, who uses ISOs in excess of 800, or absolute max of 1600; a far cry from 25400.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

SlowSong Plus
12 9.1k 30 England
15 Feb 2017 5:54PM
I always fix the highest iso on all my cameras to not go above 1600. I suspect hardly anyone would want more than 6400, so these enormous numbers are a bit silly, IMHO.
Chrism8 13 951 27 England
15 Feb 2017 6:00PM
I've a Pentax K1 and 645 and both handle 6400 superbly well.
sherlob Plus
14 3.1k 129 United Kingdom
15 Feb 2017 6:12PM
It's horses for courses. If you shoot a lot of low light work handheld having the capability of a high ISO makes sense. Not everyone needs such a feature - but then again how many of use all the features of our kit?
StrayCat 16 19.1k 3 Canada
15 Feb 2017 6:22PM
But would you see an ISO limit of 25400 as a con on any camera?
SlowSong Plus
12 9.1k 30 England
15 Feb 2017 6:33PM
Not a con as such, just irrelevant.
Chris_L 6 5.5k United Kingdom
15 Feb 2017 6:35PM
NO - It's a total pro, I was shooting crashing waves at the weekend, set camera to f8.0 1/2000th second and Auto ISO. I get fantastic results at ISOs up to 6400, higher ISOs show noise, but 12800 on the Sony is more like 800 was on my MFT
Chris_L 6 5.5k United Kingdom
15 Feb 2017 6:40PM
No it's not irrelevant. If there's not enough light for your required shutter speed and you've maxed the aperture for that subject, do you stop shooting or do you turn up the ISO?

ISOs of over 40,000 etc






SlowSong Plus
12 9.1k 30 England
15 Feb 2017 6:54PM
Why not just wait till it's a bit lighter? If you can't see what you're photographing in the dark I don't see the point.
15 Feb 2017 7:29PM
I use the highest ISO setting on my camera for test shots in low light situations, otherwise I usually try to not go beyond ISO 1600, as on my camera things start to quite ugly at ISO 3200 and beyond, I would use higher ISO settings on a camera that handled noise better. If I couldn't achieve a shot without using the higher ISO settings, where noise is seriously impacting on quality, I'd rather pack up and go home.

Does it not come done to consumers expectations for higher ISO levels, as with megapixel counts? Who actually needs 24.2 megapixels (Nikon D3300) and more, or ISO 3,280,000 (Nikon D5)?
StrayCat 16 19.1k 3 Canada
15 Feb 2017 7:55PM
The way I see it, people fall for these artificial marketing ploys that they come up with; one company produces a camera that goes to over 100,000 ISO, so as far as some of the reviewers are concerned, anything less is not acceptable, even though virtually nobody needs, or uses it. I'd be quite happy with a max ISO of 1600, I can't remember using more, but then I'm not a pro. Because the limit is so high on certain cameras doesn't mean it's useable, does it, not for practical purposes anyway?
15 Feb 2017 8:06PM
I had a phrase in mind when I read this post and was typing my reply "unique selling point" This is really what I think it comes down to.
banehawi Plus
16 2.2k 4149 Canada
15 Feb 2017 8:06PM
There are cameras that shoot in total darkness! If a person wanted one like that, they would be mighty disappointed if it was noisy at over 25K. But yes Den, its rather silly, a version of go-faster stripes on cars.
Dave_Canon Plus
14 1.8k United Kingdom
15 Feb 2017 8:13PM
Checking my LR catalogue of 25,000 images, I have used ISO 1600 or above 3.5% of the shots and almost all of the shots were night or indoors. Some of these shots were hand held so High ISO was essential. Some theatre shot did use a tripod but you are stuck with the lighting available and there is movement so again short shutter speeds are still necessary. For my Canon 5D Mkii, it seems almost noise free at 1600 but I may use some noise reduction for 3200 and certainly for above 3200.

I did try taking shots of Rugby at my local stadium but they will not allow cameras with interchangeable lenses so I took my Lumix FZ00 for a floodlit late winter afternoon match. I was forced to use ISO 800 and 1250 and the shots were unusable due to noise.

Dave
User_Removed 6 328 United Kingdom
15 Feb 2017 8:47PM
We rarely go above 6400, but have shot at 12,000 and above a few times when we really wanted to get the subject come what may - as is often the case with wildlife enthusiasts such as ourselves...

Been hearing the same kind of arguments against almost every advance in camera tech. Higher mpix, faster fps - it's all useful if someone uses it.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.