this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Photography

24 readers
1 users here now

A place to politely discuss the tools, technique and culture of photography.

This is not a good place to simply share cool photos/videos or promote your own work and projects, but rather a place to discuss photography as an art and post things that would be of interest to other photographers.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Although the megapixel fetish race is the one that gets the most attention, I think the ISO equivalent is also pretty amusing (in a "shakes head, looks baffled" kind of way).

Now, I should preface all this by mentioning that I don't have a "genre" of photography. I just photograph whatever attracts my attention at any given time, and that can be day or night.

Recently I saw a camera review in which the reviewer was showing pictures captured at ISOs that would have been considered witchcraft even ten years ago. They looked like garbage - noisy as anything and generally an aesthetic mess. But apparently the fact that they were taken at stratospheric ISO levels means that the whole world must see them because, I don't know, reasons.

Although I've used cameras that are well known for good high ISO performance, a look through my Google photos collection shows me that I almost never go beyond ISO 3200, and I would guess that less than 5% of my (tens of thousands of) photos are shot at that sensitivity. On a usual day, I find that if I have a fast lens (F2 or quicker), I can get almost anything I want to shoot without going past ISO 800, or 1600 in a pinch.

I'd be interested to hear from people who do use these 5-or-6 digit ISOs on a regular basis, and what they shoot that necessitates these ISOs. Let's hear some thoughts.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zashypoo@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I feel like some people shoot high iso to cover up for their laziness… At least for street/ travel style photography, resorting to noisy high iso where you shouldn’t even be taking that photo in the first place as the lighting is shit.

At the end of the day, photography is about capturing light… if you don’t have any, you either create it, go long exposure, or leave the scene!

[–] Tasty_Comfortable_77@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I definitely agree with this - although given some of the rather aggressive responses to this thread, it seems to be a minority opinion. The thing about these mega-high ISOs is that they can encourage people to shoot in practically zero light "because they can", regardless of whether they should.

[–] bouncyboatload@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

what the hell does this even mean?

I'm shooting basketball in a dim gym so need fast shutter speed and high iso. can't use flash to blind players. so your solution is to not shoot anything?

I'm shooting a concert, singer is jumping around, low light, I can't use a flash. so don't shoot?

I'm shooting owl that only flys and hunrs when it's dark. just don't shoot it?

high iso enables use cases that are difficult to capture other wise. that's the whole point

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)