The TRUTH about shooting at ISO 100 that the PROS know.
Want to take amazing wildlife photos? Check out my new course with 20 modules and over 5 hours of content, no fluff!
journalofwildlifephotography....
Join me in Botswana in 2024!
www.simondentremont.com/botsw...
My name is Simon d'Entremont and I'm a professional wildlife and nature photographer from Eastern Canada. In this video I'll share with why shooting at ISO 100 is advice best left unsaid.
I use Topaz Labs software for noise reduction, sharpening and upscaling:
topazlabs.com/ref/1943/Simon/...
Music in intro: "Nicer", by Houses on the Hill. Find that, and other sound effects at Epidemic Sounds
share.epidemicsound.com/0fbndn
My equipment:
Canon R8 body amzn.to/3Iv9aAS
Canon R5 body amzn.to/3UQeROc
Canon R6 body amzn.to/3RpYqVX
Canon R8 body amzn.to/3AR2mcA
Canon R5 battery grip amzn.to/3dUrHKF
Canon 100-400 EF II amzn.to/3UQi4gJ
Canon 17-40 L lens amzn.to/3y71MGt
Canon RF 16mm f2.8 amzn.to/3EmPNJ1
FLM Tripod (CP 34 L4 II) and Levelling Head (HB 75) www.flmcanada.com?aff=sdentrem
Sigma Art 50mm f1.4 lens amzn.to/3fkRjAC
Sigma Art 20mm f1.4 lens amzn.to/3CjKto2
Rokinon 135mm f2 lens amzn.to/3SoB3x3
Sirui x-k40 ball head amzn.to/3E7Z5sc
Sirui lightweight Traveler 7C tripod with head amzn.to/3dS9Bca
Manfrotto Video Head amzn.to/3RlZie5
Wimberley Gimbal Head amzn.to/3flhya8
Jackery portable 240 lithium-ion battery amzn.to/3rCzX5r
ProGrade Gold 128 GB CF Express amzn.to/3fyx1nh
ProGrade Cobalt 325 GB CF Express amzn.to/3y3Ywf1
ProGrade Gold 256 GB SD amzn.to/3y0Xssg
Zoom H1n field recorder amzn.to/3Sozob9
Comica shotgun mic amzn.to/3REWN73
Rode Videomic NTG shotgun mic amzn.to/3BRlcQK
Rode Wireless GO II mic set amzn.to/3BUfIoh
Lenscoat neoprene camera bags amzn.to/3SNiqmz
Lencoat rain cover for 500mm F4 amzn.to/3SGtyl2
Falconeyes F7 LCD panel amzn.to/3y75z6F
Lowepro 450 AW large backpack amzn.to/3xZOHyL
Lowepro Flipside 300 small backpack amzn.to/3SOTWt7
Mindshift 36L (closest available) backpack amzn.to/3C0fagy
DJI Mavic Air 2S drone (flymore combo) amzn.to/3M9TuDL
B&W circular polarizer, 77mm amzn.to/3SKc6Mx
B&W 2 stop ND Filter amzn.to/3URyIN6
B&W 6 stop ND filter amzn.to/3y6gs8G
B&W 10 stop ND filter amzn.to/3fwRIjs
Nikon Monarch 5 8x42 binoculars amzn.to/3URprEz
Blackrapid retro-classic shoulder strap amzn.to/3y0wUHt
FjallRaven trekking pants amzn.to/3y77DeV
Heat 3 gloves (shell only) www.theheatcompany.com/en-us/...
Heat Company Merino Wool liners www.theheatcompany.com/en-us/...
HP Omen 17.3" performance laptop amzn.to/3BZ7w69
Synology NAS storage amzn.to/3BXfcWF
16 TB hard drives for NAS amzn.to/3LTdrOW
Follow me on:
Facebook / sdentrem
Instagram / simon.dentremont
Website www.simondentremont.com/
“The high ISO is revealing that your photo was noisy in the first place and not that the high ISO creates the noise”. Beautiful stuff 👌🏽
If ISO is not what makes the noise but rather reveals it. So where is the noise is coming from?
@@nasserkaoukno proper lighting or proper exposure
@@nasserkaouk Many sources, but you have no control over them because they are on the sensor and its readout and initial processing. These depend on technology specifics, sensor design specs such as required readout speed, and sensor readout mode, and on the required digital white balance. What you can control is light level. If you cannot add light to get better signal per noise on the photon level and on the electronics level, as we do in video, lighting for f5.6 ISO640 1/50 or whatever is required, with proper ISO you are making sure you are avoiding noise from an additional source. This is the noise from the digital signal level on the actual storage format. A RAW or compressed image or video have their own noise floor according to compression type, data rate and bit depth of format. and in modern video formats this is not static because it raises with higher amounts of motion and higher texture detail. If your digital signal is low on the recording format, it will have quantization, which reduces tonality, or even artifacts such as compression blocks and loss of shadow stops in some areas that were fine on the sensor level. A good recording level is a requirement in digital formats, especially compressed ones. Uncompressed floating point color formats will solve this, but it is not yet feasible. Formats that are far better than the sensor also reduce this problem. Most cameras in medium ISO only produce 5 to 6 bits of color, so a very capable high bit depth and low compression format will store the images fine even at low level, and I mean underexposed and in low ISO.
It's a slightly misleading example though - if you compare properly exposed images across the ISO range the noise will increase with the ISO. Same with grain on film stock. The pro trick here is to prioritise a correct exposure and to know your camera.
@@a__rankin If you have light, you will use it. In technical imaging we do not only light for best image, we also use a custom color filter to eliminate white balance gain/multiplication. This can add two stops to the blue information.
This has to be the most I have learned from a KZhead video this year.
The most misinformation.
Exactly this :D
How have I never been taught this before! 🤯 I was always told the high ISO created the noise, and that it was better to brighten in post. This is a real game changer. You are such a gifted teacher, Simon. Thank you 🙏
I must tell you something: This is the first time I've heard this advice and I really understood perfectly how the signal-to-noise ratio applied to sensors works (since I'm an electronics graduate as well as a photographer). Everything became logical after your explanation. In addition, the new denoise function in Lightroom had already prompted me to increase the ISO in my photos, with amazing results. I, who had even forgotten about the automatic ISO function on my Nikon, went and started using it in conjunction with the manual exposure controls. I really liked the results and I didn't see any photos where denoise was essential. This post of yours deserves to be printed out and put up on my wall. A big hug and sincere thanks.
Welcome!
Right on. First time watching this channel. The advice in this video is gold. And your comment is helpful. Thank you. 🙏🏽
Yeah as soon as he said it's like a gain knob that was the aha moment.
@@MatticusNicholas On my astrophotography cameras there is no ISO, just a slider called « Gain ».
However I feel your explanation is introducing the misconception that gain/iso balances exposure and one can trade one for the other easily. However, ideally, just talking about a satisfactory SNR (not taking artistic factors into acount, e.g. minimizing exposure time), exposure and gain reach a minimum below which higher gain levels cannot compensate low exposure. Which is, because signal increases linearly with exposure but noise only with square root. Whereas shifting signal+noise levels with gain are both linearly proportional to each other. Or did I get that wrong (I just know from my time working with detectors for electron radiation, we needed to consider just that)
Good video. The basic message, which I've believed for years: far more photos are ruined by out-of-focus subjects (resulting from insufficient depth of field) or motion blur than were ever ruined by excessive noise. Most viewers will notice out-of-focus and blur instantly; few will complain about noise. And as Simon pointed out, noise is now pretty easy to fix.
100 pct
Ya I think most of the ppl that are irritated by the post don't necessarily disagree as much as they disrespect a mf using click bait titles and power words...u instantly can't trust a person who uses these deceptive practices to get views. So there should b no surprise that a bunch of ppl are hating on/blocking this dkwad. "THE TRUTH" ya left out a shocking there clickbaiter
And THAT was always true.
If I’m permitted some dissent, some of the higher ISO shots here are noticeably paler in colour but most importantly (to me) are all unnaturally frozen. With all the advances in digital cameras, we’ve been left with talented, knowledgeable photographers with thousand of dollars of equipment shooting photos of taxidermied looking animals 😅 because now any motion is deemed as bad! Same happens with live shows of bands, etc.
What crasy ISO numbers !!!! I used to photograph with Kodachrome 64 (only 64 ISO) or Fuji Provia 400F or 400X (400 ISO). For mooving subjects in bad lighting, I had to turn to B&W with Ilford Delta 1000 (pushed to 3200 and developped in XTol, even then it was quite grainy)... You should really hold the camera stady with Kodachrome 64 if not using a tripod, and it was either no depth of field or not enough shutter speed, often both lacking (but what a great film non the less)... but... I could have never gotten this soaring howl picture with those low ISO ! 📷
Seeing this video, I feel like I just got released from ISO prison
From ISOlation, you might say
Same. My photographer life so far has been a lie... and I am now free.
Your explanations have the clarity, simplicity, and elegance that only come with true expertise. So glad I found your channel!
This is when I wish KZhead has a "favorite" or "double thumbs up" for a video.👍👍
I moved to auto ISO for most handheld shooting years ago. I was reticent to use auto anything but I realised I was missing potentially great shots all over the place in my quest for low ISO, super detailed images. Now I stick with auto ISO unless it’s a landscape shot on a tripod. A sharp shot with ISO 800 is better than a blur at ISO 100 every single time.
Similar here: When using manual flashes, I use a fixed ISO. Otherwise I use the custom settings for quickly switching between the "people" setting with a shutter speed not slower than a 1/200th of a second and whatever ISO necessary and other frequent use cases. It doesn't help the foto if it's virtually noise free but OTOH the person in the image suffers from motion blur.
For fast shots... found my camera does 100-25600 with acceptable grain/noise, so have auto-ISO set to do it. Did an entire convention without touching my flash at all without much issue. One less thing to have to deal with when taking photos. Also use Aperture priority, and back button AF, with Continuous auto-focus mode, and works well.
@@wolphin732 I’ve used back button focus for the last 7 years. Would never go back to focusing with the shutter. I keep mine in manual mostly and select the aperture and shutter speed I want and let the auto ISO deal with the rest. If the ISO is creeping up a bit more than I want for the occasional shot, I open the aperture a bit and use a slightly slower shutter to compensate.
I never used auto ISO until recently. Vast improvement! For general hand held shots I mostly use auto ISO, stop down one stop and, if appropriate, bracket exposures. Manual ISO is just for specific cases.
Same. Manual Mode with Auto ISO, and then if I want I can limit how high the Auto ISO can go. I'm just a neophyte, but it's worked well for me so far.
You can almost hear the collective gasps of the iso snobs. 😂 THANK YOU for dispelling these decades-long myths, Simon!
99% of photographers are snobs lmao
@@Perceptence One kind of camera snob that I know about, by being one, is the belief that only full-frame cameras with fast glass are "professional", because you can get more extreme bokeh with them. You CAN get better bokeh from a full-frame camera with fast glass, but maximum bokeh is not always necessary, or even desirable. I still like my full-frame and fast 85mm for portraiture, but lots of "lesser" cameras can take fine portraits.
The gasp is echoing.
ISO number is a concept from analog photography. It made sense in those times, because sensitivity came with the price of granularity. In digital photography it’s all about S/N.
Been shooting full time 10 years and never heard this at all but I'm a cinematographer and almost never film without additional lighting 😅
I was stuck in the "ISO 100" mindset for a long time, because the only camera I had was a Lumix from about 2005 with a max ISO of 400. After getting a more modern camera, it took a while for me to realize that I could get some really clean looking shots at higher ISO, especially indoors.
I figured out a long time ago I'd rather be able to run a faster shutter speed to capture action (which doesn't have to be something as crazy as sports, it can be a laugh, or quick smile, or a sideways glance) and if it had a little noise but was otherwise clean I was almost always happier.
Wanted to comment that I only recently broke my shackles of low ISO. Seeing this video has now given me confidence to continue this sensation of freedom! Thanks! Subscribed
I primarily work with audio. You stating that the issue is noise to signal ratio was all I needed to hear to make it all click. My hero.
I have found no other photographer on YT who is this well spoken while also being charming, knowledgeable, humble and perhaps most importantly, not boring. An excellent teacher.
Yeah..and he's good to.
Too kind!
The gain knob analogy is absolutely spot-on. In audio recordings, it works EXACTLY like that. Every room has noise, but bringing the gain knob higher, you make it more evident if there's no clear signal being sent to the microphone to increase the signal to noise ratio.
I knew this intuitively but the way he demonstrated everything was absolutely masterful. Wow.
I'm a wedding photographer and I used to shoot at ridiculously low ISO settings because I was so afraid of getting a noisy image but then the images always turned out to be noisy anyway because I was shooting at such low ISOs. The more that I comfortable I got with shooting at higher ISOs, the better my images looked.
Or just use a set of flashes like most pro photographers use. Most of the time there’s no reason to use a crazy high iso
@@matthoffman6962you completely missed the point. Congratulations
@@maxbtl lol thanks for the comment
Except the images didn't turn out to be noisy anyways because you were shooting at low ISOs, it was because you didn't know how to properly light for that ISO.
@@hankkingsley9183 in time, you will learn that you don't always have the ability, or even the permission, tu use studio lights and flashes everywhere :) I cover live events and concerts, flashes are strictly forbidden and i don't have a say in the light show, high ISO capabiliy is THE deciding factor when choosing a new camera body No two fields of photography are equal and your views and experience don't always translate to universal truths
Simon is a master at explaining things. Its always clean and easily digestible. Loving it!
Wow, thanks!
@@simon_dentremont It's true - you have the gift of simplifying complex subjects so that everyone can understand. When I took early retirement a year ago and was finally able to spend time on photography, yours was one of the first channels I discovered and subscribed to. I've learned a huge amount already from your videos (your earlier video on using Manual + Auto ISO was an important one!). Many, many thanks!
He is a good communicator and I wish I had a teacher like him in photography, no nonsense.
Your not wrong !
I have been shooting for 30 years. Never had ISO so clearly explained.
Holy cow. Those pictures are incredible.
I just started photography and was following the "keep ISO as low as possible" rule. I kept getting angry because my photos were blurry. I have shaky hands and my shutter speed was very low. I'm glad that you've taught me to not be scared of higher ISO's and realise that they go that high for a reason!
A good approach is to choose the widest lens aperture (smallest f-number) that delivers an adequate depth of field and the slowest shutter speed that will freeze movement to your liking without blowing out important highlights. Those settings not only control two important creative elements of a photo, they also determine exposure and the amount of light used to make the photo. From there, choose an ISO - or delegate that choice to the camera through auto ISO - that delivers an image having a pleasing lightness. The more attention given to those creative settings of f-stop and shutter speed, the higher the likelihood you'll make pleasing photos...at any ISO.
Hope you have shake reduction. I think mine adds about 3 stops or so. Experiment to see what shutter speeds you can reliably shoot and then up the ISO when needed.
Use a heavy tripod the 3rd most important gear besides, in order, your brain, your camera, your tripod...
I have shaky hands to it sucks.
@@Not_So_Weird_in_Austin Agreed. Least loved most essential gear
This video is proof that even the nature of KZhead can't quash all authentic, informative, and interesting content. This is a sample of quality. Thanks for the tips, Simon.
Appreciate that
brownnosing there Brad....
@@emetahava No. I just think that when you see quality in a swamp of mediocrity, it should be pointed out. Let's encourage those who are producing concise, clear, and worthwhile information. I guess you haven't been there when I've roundly criticized a lot of the junk out there. :)
Wow. Absolutely not. - This video is terrible misinformation. Just clickbait. Don‘t watch it. The guy doesn’t know anything about photography.
@@christocan4710 I've been in photography a long time. I even developed my own black-and-white film with those old metal film reels back in the day. Oh, do I appreciate digital cameras. :) But I'm not too old to learn something. I think Simon provides that. I see no reason to denigrate him.
This is refreshing to hear. After 25 years of photography (and also having a career that involves signal and image processing on a far more technical level) I came to the same conclusion. But you are right, the religion surrounding 100 ISO is so strong that I kind of just keep it to myself because it is a strange third rail myth that many professionals seem to refuse to understand. It is also becoming less relevant as newer cameras have better noise cancelation internally and de-noising and sharpening algorithms are getting batter by the day.
When I discovered this tip years ago, it changed my photography! Now, I barely notice the ISO on my screen, just get the right shutter speed and the right F number and the rest is easy. Great tip!
The day I lost fear of high ISO was when I watched your video on manual with auto ISO. I started shooting not worrying about ISO and when I uploaded the files to my pc I was amazed at how many of those photos were taken at ISO 1600 and you couldn't really notice. Truly eye-opening.
You have taught me not to be afraid of getting out of "Auto" mode on my camera, and to experiment with ISO, aperture, and shutter speed. My photos have greatly improved because of it. I am going to Scotland this fall - I am expecting better photos than I have previously taken.
I'm the opposite, afraid of using auto modes, such as for iso. I need to work on being more flexible in certain situations. Especially since we now have the denoise feature in Lightroom Classic.
@@L.Spencer Understand your feelings. Experiment with it. Try limiting how far the camera can adjust the ISO. And try printing as well. It's unlikely you'll even see minor noise. The experience will be the best way to get over any concerns, and learn your personal limits on how far you let auto ISO adjust. Happy experimenting!
Never gettin tired of hearing that name🔥
This was something I learned about a few years ago, going on a trip with a friend of mine who is a highly regarded dog photographer and me, being a landscape photographer. She instantly was amazed by the low ISO I was always trying to use. She tought me that having the right shutter speed was all I needed... Let the 'ISO fear' go... Since that moment, I've been so relieved!!! Using high ISO's all the time to get the crisp images I need...
Basically, the ISO from a flim camera and from a digital camera is not the same and not comparable. My mindset was stuck in the film era, where we would prefer to shoot 100 ISO and below as 800 ISO film was just too grainy. We have come a long way in digital photography. Thank you for this video.
But film at ASA 100 can also be grainy if shot in low light
Precisely. Film is why many think high ISO is bad. Good video, good comment.
@@puaspitonOld digital was worse than high ISO film.
@@joel6376 Exactly. On my first two digitals I actually went to 50 and 60 as much as I could. I used tripod (sometimes as monopod) A LOT. IIRC early dSLR's could go ISO 400 MAX. At resolution of 3 Mpix. Before Nikon D300 you could pretty much forget about clean nightime shots, because even with tripod and bulb mode, sensors ran hot and therefore noisy. And unfortunately digital noise exists also, maybe even more, in colour, while film grains is only in luminance. Yeah, today I can shoot ISO 3200 with my phone, no problem. And of course you need to understand exposure time and your subject, because shooting landscapes, or even more waterscapes and infrastructure, is totally different from shooting wildlife or sports. In the first case you sometimes use ND filters to make exposure longer on purpose.
A lot of filmcameras have the perfect fit around iso 400...
The sensor dynamic range decreases at higher ISO, it's not just the noise and SNR ratio. Having said that, a lot of full frame cameras retain more than satisfactory dynamic range until ISO 2000, even ISO 3200. This is more important for landscapes. In regards to noise, what you say is completely accurate.
In addition to that color depth is decreased in higher iso as well.
here is an example for the sony A7 III in color depth reduction cdn.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CS_Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV-vs-Nikon-D850-vs-Sony-A7-III-1024x468.png
Dynamic range may decrease at higher ISO, but an under exposed image with "high dynamic range" will still look worse than a properly exposed image.
Sensors have a 'native' ISO so setting below that also reduces dynamic range. As a cinematographer I work to the camera's native ISO as much as possible.
Do some tests. Shoot with plenty of light at 100 iso, and then 800 iso. You will see a marked difference in grain/noise. What you determine is "satisfactory" is entirely subjective.
I am forever thankful to you for teaching me this. I was clueless because I was alway taught to keep that ISO low. I set my camera in Manual with ISO in automatic and boom everything changed.
I do mostly event shoots. Weddings, concerts, public events, corporate events, etc. An even mixture of indoor and outdoor, good lighting, great lighting, bad lighting, etc. I almost always keep my A7RIII on auto ISO with a cap depending on the environment. I've never been disappointed when the ISO is higher than I expected it to be. I attribute it to the high powered sensors in these mirrorless cameras. Point is, ISO is absolutely necessary in many cases and my work is a perfect example of that.
This is BY FAR the best explanation and reasoning I've ever heard in a video. Very clear terminology with visual demonstrations and use of examples. A child might be able to understand everything you're saying here. Exceptional job!
I grew up in photography. My father was a great photographer. I became a lab manager for other photographers. Back then we used film and if you used anything over 400 ASA the photos would have a lot of grain or noise in them. So everyone would try to shoot with 100 , 64 or 25 ASA. ASA changed to ISO in 1974. People think that ASA was for film and ISO was for digital, but this isn't the case. If you have a film that is ASA 400 or 400 ISO, they have the exact same light sensitivity as one another. But you probably already new this. Everyone thought that digital would never be as good as film. I'm guilty of this. Since I started shooting wildlife I quickly found out that auto ISO is the way to go! The information you provide is priceless! I look forward to your videos, they have taught me a lot. Thank you!
I still have some 64 for slides on my freezer!!!!!!
I shot lots of 400 and some 1000 film back in the day. Yes, they were grainy. The best thing about digital is you can EXPERIMENT. Try every ISO and see what it does. Not quite an option for film
I am just returning to amateur photography after many years. Canon 4000D will server with my budget and I loved back in the days to shoot with my 35mm Nikon with usually no low than ISO 400 (ISO 800 was much more expensive, but I also carried one of those with me) as my pictures back then were much sharper. Very nice video. I already see that I will like your channel very much!
After 10 years of photography I finally understand ISO, thank you for this video
The real trick is taking the time to learn the limits of your camera in terms of ISO performance. It is important to know where the tipping point of a camera is in acceptable high ISO noise. Once you know the upper limit, you can set the ISO range for using auto ISO. In terms of cropping there is an old adage that states " if you think you are close enough, get closer".
His point is that there is no limit where you’re better off just underexposing the shot. If you can create more light by adjusting the shutter speed or aperture, that is sometimes preferable. If you cannot, then you must raise the ISO as much as needed.
The upper limit comes from what the image is for. If you’re just shooting for your own enjoyment, there is no limit but when you work for a client, you have to know what the requirements for a usable image are. Sometimes it can be flexible, other times there’s a hard limit and you have to plan your gear accordingly.
@@stickgarrote8582 That sounds like situations where the lighting is too poor to produce a professional image, not situations where underexposing the shot is better than raising the ISO. That’s the lighting exceeding a limit, not the ISO.
The simple truth is every camera absolutely *does* have an upper limit where raising ISO *will* produce worse results and as such this point should only really be crossed as a last resort and certainly not without consideration, and that many cameras *do* use auto ISO in a way that raises the ISO way too much way too quickly for the intended result, increasing the noise and decreasing dynamic range as a result while gaining nothing. So as always in photography, if you want to get the best results, learn to use your camera to its maximum potential and know its strengths and weaknesses inside out so you can take advantage of the strengths and avoid the weaknesses. Which is photography 101, really, and applies to any camera you'll ever use, be it a simple point-and-shoot (or camera phone) or an expensive full-frame DSLR with lenses that cost a small fortune.
@@Case_ So you’re saying it is better to underexpose and brighten in post-processing than raise the ISO beyond the alleged limit? The point of the video is that if those are your only two options, raising the ISO is less problematic. Obviously we’re talking about situations with no other options (e.g., slower shutter will produce motion blur and aperture is already wide open).
I absolutely agree and love this advice. Took me years to understand that having noise is way less of a problem than risking blurry photos.
Far as I know, you also lose dynamic range and color depth sensitivity going higher on ISO.
I just started photography and im so glad i started watching your videos. The way you deliver the information really helps me understand not just how to do something but why. So thank you
I just started 2 months ago and yes, so much this. People have been telling me certain things like “turn your ISO to this” or “make sure your aperture is this” and I’ve been screaming “W H Y ?” for the entire two months. This has been beyond helpful.
Only go to the lowest ISO "IF" you have enough lighting to do so. Most important is getting the shot with the lighting you have. Your information is absolutely correct. Thank you for bringing the subject for newer photographers.
I’ve been working in the outdoor industry for over 10 years, but only recently took the dive into telephoto glass for wildlife images. I was nervous about shooting high ISOs until the photographers I was working with shared their knowledge. Your videos are great confirmation of practices and feature great ideas. I really appreciate what you’re doing! Cheers, from BC and SE Alaska!
I do a lot of stage photography. My default iso ranges from 5000-8000. My shutter pretty much stays at 500 because performers move so fast. I still deal with a bit of noise, but Topaz helps a lot. I have been able to get so many wonderful photos out of these settings.
Eye opener Vlog for me Simon! Yep ... for my generation, who learned photography on negative and reversal films were available. I am 72 now, for me age is just a number and there is no age limit to learning! Creative people never retire! I served in advertising and headed the creative teams of leading advertising agencies in Pakistan. Whenever we were outdoors for a shoot, my favorite film was Kodak Ektachrome, 50 ASA. No noise and ultra sharp images with vivid colors even using images for posters through process printing. Now I am a consultant and brand developer, do photography myself with strobes. My most favorite areas are food, products, portraits and street photography. All the very best Simon! Rgds. ♥
DAAAAAMNNN, this is a big revelation for me... I am so glad I found this channel
I'm always grateful for guys like Simon, who offer up their time & expertise.Thank you, you make photography so much easier to learn.
Glad you like them!
I have watched several videos from you now, and all of them say not to stick to iso 100. After trying it out myself, I had no luck at getting sharp images, even at 3200. After consistently raising the iso and adjusting the other settings accordingly, I'm now more comfortable shooting higher iso and can get sharp images with it. Thank you for being such a great teacher and balancing knowledge and information with examples and fun. You're one of my go to guys with questions now, and I greatly appreciate the knowledge. Thank you
As a film and video production major and someone that has taken photos all my life you got an instant sub from me brother. Fantastic content. I have no idea how I haven’t found your channel sooner! Great information.
Welcome aboard!
Your post was changed my photos quality! Brilliant information! Thank you, thank you!
I’m just getting back into photography after over a decade away from it and I have not at all been happy with my work. This video just explained exactly what I’ve been doing wrong. Thank you so much!!
It took me few years to learn and stop being ISO purist and I can't show how much happy I'm to see the same train of thoughts from the professional like you! Bravo to you for this! 👋💪
To be honest, old cameras were very noisy back in the day. Before 2010, there were many cameras which were noisy as hell even at ISO800 and 1600 was the limit. There werent so much auto settings for ISO and minimal shutter speed, so its not only about learning the lesson of ISO. I learned to shoot at very high ISO through birding because you have f/5,6 - 6,3 apertures and need 1/1000 or higher and have to accept what the camera tells you and you cant and wont buy a 600mm f4 lens for a hobby to get around this a little bit. Most pictures look noisy because of wrong focus or wrong shutter speed.
Fellow Canadian here! Just recently got into photography and stumbled upon your channel by just looking up advice and tips! Very informative and is great for someone like me who is trying to understand what the living Heck I am doing! A lot of of my friends are constantly telling me to go at lowest ISO possible. Thank you so much for all the information and education, kind Sir!
Was expecting a really hot take from the title, but this video delivered way beyond expectations. I love how you emphasize on the fact that getting the shot is much more important than micromanaging all the settings to get a technically ISO sound image, and missing the shot or ruining it with the other two parts of the exposure triangle not being at the right settings for the scene. Great to see a rep for auto ISO too, learn how to use metering and your shots with auto ISO will come out perfect. Every photographer needs to see this video!
Simon has really changed my photography. It's rare to hear these type of scary myths discussed. I love using auto ISO. I have caught so many amazing shots because of it. I used to think auto ISO was icky. I've learned so much more from this channel than most. My shots are more consistent. Better exposed. Sharper, better. It isn't just talk. This channel has taught me so much. Keep up the great work Simon!
Great to hear!
When I started photography (60 years ago) it was all about film, and the standard film was 100 ASA (which became ISO). It was based on normal lighting in the middle of the day for shooting at f8 and 100th second. The only other option was 400 ASA film for sports, or if you were using transparency film (which was the best by far) you could get 32 ASA film that was great for anything where your subject was static. Digital changed everything.
32 sounds crazy cool!
I started photography 30 years ago, just before digital entered the world of photography. I was always using film 100, but that limitation helped me to fall in love with my aperture settings. I actually think those who learned on film have a technical and artistic advantage over those who grew up 100% digital.
I learned and "grew up" using a DSLR but could not stand the auto or "creative" settings, so I'd always just shoot on manual. I recently got into film and not much is different other than the fact I have to manually focus everything and am locked into a specific ISO until I am done the roll of film.@@Ric9hardify Exposing for the shadows instead of the highlights was the hardest thing to get used to.
I was shooting in low light a lot back then and was always pushing 400 asa to 800. I loved the way it looked.
@@davidgreus3041 In the late 90's, I used to use Kodak Ektar 25 to shoot candid portraits and things not moving. I loved the color saturation more than any other film I ever tried. The enlargements were also some of the best I ever had. I usually carried two bodies because the one with the 25 in it was unusable so much of the time because of it not being bright enough to shoot without a tripod. It's nice now not having to go through 24 or 36 exposures to finish off a roll of film before you can change the ISO.
I'm just under 5 mins in and this has been the most clear and helpful video I've found in months. Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
I've been scared about high ISO's since I started dabbling in photography (10 years ago or so on a strictly amateur level). Bending over backwards to get the ISO down to 50 or 100... with many dark underexposed photos that I tried to ""save" later in Lightroom, Darktable or whatever software I was using. This "scare" also made me (only) look at lenses with F/1.2 or 1.4 or (in the worst case) 1.8. A new world opened up for me when I let go of the ISO-scare and put it on Auto. I've been taking test photos with a high (for me) ISO setting (over 1200) and then fiddled with the noise reduction in Rawtherapee (which I use for my raw-files). Works just fine and I can finally let go of the fear and start looking at F/4 lenses and a whole new world opened up for me. Thank you for explaining this :)
He is the only who can really show you the way to be a better photographer, because noone else can show you what you really need to know Thanks Simon
I actually really like luma noise in printed photos and typically just remove the chroma noise. Creates a nice organic textured look in my opinion. We shouldn’t fear noise as much. It’s the chroma noise that looks digital and cheap. The luma noise can be very pleasant.
Me being a fan of unprofessional looking, capture of the moment photographs, I think even chroma noise has a feel to it, like the look of a cheap point and shoot film camera.
@@candle_eatistcolour film does not create chroma noise, that happens with digital sensors when scanning poorly exposed negatives
@@alvareo92 I'm saying chroma noise gives a feeling similar to that of the look of a cheap film camera, not that cheap film cameras create chroma noise.
that is one of the best explanation videos i've watched so far as a beginner photographer! thank you so much, the video explained everything i needed to know about the ISO which was quite confusing for me because i could never get it right for my images not being over- or underexposed. Thank you so much 👍
Most helpful thing for me, "The noise was already there, the ISO just reveled that it was there." That is exactly what I needed to know. "Noise comes from not enough light, not from high ISO." Thanks!
Glad it helped!
When ISO100 wasn't flexible enough for me, I learned to default myself at 400. From there I play around the shutter
I love using my ISO! Enjoy Botswana! I've been there and it's heaven
It really is!
Continue to learn more from this video. Thank you Sir.
Great stuff. I'm a wildlife/landscape photographer and can confirm I've gotten some great shots at crazy high ISO. I once shot a barn own in the middle of a snow storm an hour after dark at 12,800. That was years ago before the huge improvements in noise reduction that have improved it a lot. Now I don't generally go too much over 3200, I heavily prioritize shutter speed and aperture on most shots. One thing that was very helpful to me in the beginning was guessing the correct exposure settings - then seeing how off I am based on the camera auto-settings, then also really understanding metering and range pictograph. It all really comes back down to understanding light then applying that to how a digital camera captures it. If you've never dived into how camera sensors work - it is very helpful. I will say video is less forgiving - but as far as photography goes, use that ISO! :)
It's really interesting, I'm an engineer who studied sensors (mostly acoustic ones) for 5 years and you're definitely right. Playing with gain / ISO is a good way to get the most signal and information. Of course you'll get more noise but it is easier to crop noise than to create additional information in the signal. I must try higher ISO.
I’ve been surprised at how much more ISO (gain) I need to create a proper exposure in the shadows that I got at lower ISO film rolls!
I'm a hobby photographer for years and I know about the concept explained in this video. But I have never seen a video explaining it so well and to the point, backed up with examples and tips. The video is neither too short nor too long. Bravo. That earned you a thumbs up and a new subscriber!!
Thanks for sharing!
This explanation is almost poetic. Much appreciated, all the best Simon.
I realized years ago that motion blur is usually much worse than noise, so I turn up ISO as much as I need to to keep exposure times short enough. Especially with modern 16-24MP sensors... even older 12MP cameras. If you're asking these questions you're most likely not printing or displaying any of your photos big enough to see the noise.
Studying cinematography really deepened my knowledge on ISO as well. In the cinema world, lower ISO shots have the dynamic range allocated toward the shadows while higher iso shots allocate the dynamic range to the highlights. So for low light scenes it’s actually MUCH better to shoot at lower ISO’s many times, because there will be significantly more detail in the dark shadows. This does mean you need to light accordingly though. Still the same principle applies, you can’t starve the sensor of light. as long as there’s lighting hitting the subject and you’re not trying to make a black hole visible, higher iso settings aren’t the end of the world
ummm... no.. this is backwards. lower iso increases the dynamic range in the highlights, and the shadows get crushed because of lack of light. higher iso will over expose the hilights reducing their dynamic range and bring out more dynamic range in the shadow, which can be pushed back down in editing. cinematography requires you to keep you shutter at half the speed of your frame rate to maintain 180 degree motion blur, so lowering your iso in a dark environment will always make you footage darker in the shadows and introduce more compression artifacts and lose you dynamic range in the shadows.
@@homewardboundphotos That is completely wrong, and @mikemarch416 said it right. When shooting video, you get more detailed highlights at higher ISO values because the camera "sacrifices" the dynamic range of the shadow areas to preserve highlights by "elevating" the dynamic range window (making the shadow areas noisier). You can see this in action in this video, along with charts: kzhead.info/sun/mN2ihs6MqXd7la8/bejne.html It's no coincidence that, for example, S-LOG starts at ISO 800, you can't set it any lower than that.
@@erikpeterffy7552 uhh what, this video you linked has exactly nothing to do with whats being talked about and is irrelevant.. you need to think about this. why would increasing the iso, and pushing the highlights closer to clipping preserve them? you're pushing them closer to the end of the dynamic range of the camera. making the image darker (lowering iso) preserves detail in the hilights. making the image brighter (raising iso) preserves detail in the shadows. log starts at 800 because it's a reverse s curve and since shadow detail is harder to retain than hilight detail, the curve favours higher iso. that's the reason. The camera doesn't "sacrifice" detail in the shadows at high iso. it just makes the shadows brighter, which is the exact opposite of sacrificing detail in the, which is exactly the point of slogs reverse s curve, because the mp4 codec it records is lossy and throws out data closer to the blacks and whites. don't even start man, i make 6 figures, have 50k worth of gear, and a 5 series bmw because the photo and video works that i do. I know what i'm talking about.
@@homewardboundphotos You are completely misunderstanding the concept of dynamic range. Increasing ISO doesn't make anything necessarily brighter, as you can achieve the same exposure at ISO100 and ISO6400 by simply using a faster shutter speed, narrower aperture or ND filter, so you don't push anything toward clipping. In the linked video you see exactly that, and the uploader literally talks about why you have more stops of dynamic range toward the brighter part of the image at higher ISO (he even encircles it for you in the diagram). Study the figure carefully at 1.34. There it is in big red and blue lettering what I am talking about. 6EV vs 8EV. As for the second half of your comment, well that gave me a good laugh. Anyone who's been shooting amateur video for at least 2-3 years knows you have no clue about video and thus the concept of the "exposure triangle". Anyway, I have 51k in gear and a 6 series BMW, so I know better. 🙃
@@erikpeterffy7552 omg your video actually validated everything I'm actually saying, you just don't understand the video XD both footages were shot AT ISO 800. He put an ND filter on it to make the image DARKER, therefore RETAINING DETAILS IN THE HIGHLIGHTS. The reason he's not just lowering the ISO in the camera is because 800 is as low as slog 3 will let you record. Record the image DARKER, retain detail in the HIGHLIGHTS. Same ISO, lower brightness (because of ND) = more detail in the highs. And guess what dumbass? The same works in the darks. Record the image BRIGHTER by increasing the ISO, and retain more detail in the shadows. Absolutely hilarious when morons share examples that actually prove them wrong, but they don't realize because they don't understand what's happening on the screen LMFAO! what an absolute joke.
I once placed a comment on this issue, the comments I received where nearly groce and I was soon banned from this place! So I always adjust Iso as you say, gives me great and full images and allows me to obtain the best result just as you say sir! I even use it in the day time with flash! And my most favorite settings are moderate high ISO (640 or so), long shutter times (0,4 seconds or so) and flash on the second curtain, this way of photography really amazes me because the effects are awesome!! Its that way that I go some of the most spectacular shots ever, even on weddings! So Thank you for this video, I only can afirm what you say!
Best advice I’ve been struggling to make my images sharp and this showed me how to … this video showed up to me without even looking for it.
During the film days, my brother and I did wildlife and landscape photography in the Rockies. He always used the lowest ISO (ASA?) possible while I was overjoyed when ISO 400 appeared. While my brother kept changing his film based on the subject, I exclusively used 400. That's when he gave me the nickname, "Old 400", and I've used that moniker ever since. Thanks for this fine training, Simon.
I did likewise in Hawaii and Alaska, Kodachrome 25. But eventually settled on Kodachrome 64 since I needed a bit more speed for bird photography.
Love 400 color film.
I learned not to worry too much about ISO back in the film era! In my country (and possibly elsewhere too?) the newspapers stopped using film and went fully digital all at the same time. (I don't remember what year it was). This meant that the camera stores had a big surplus of 800 ISO films that they could no longer sell to the press photographers. So these films suddenly became cheaper than the 200 ISO films that we amateurs usually bought. And I got great results with ISO 800! Noise was much less of a problem than I had anticipated. It took me some time to fully understand why this was so, but using higher ISO was a good lesson.
I'm old enough to remember the term ASA (film speed). The camera's I used had the ASA dial setting on the top of the camera. I used quite a bit of Kodacolor Gold , ASA's 100, 200 & 400. different times but similar techniques.
@@jimbruton9482 I started shooting on film when I was a kid (I'm 32 now) because my dad always loved photography. I used to get ASA 400 film and it felt like I was ready for everything lol like strapping your fastest shoes
My photos getting better so quickly after watching your videos ❤
Honestly your explanation on auto iso is right on point. I used to shoot full manual exclusively but you’d always get burners for either tests or if you’re shouting a quickly moving subject in a highly dynamic scene. Auto iso just completes your exposure within your given parameters. I know that if I’m using auto iso I will at least get an image that could be milked in processing to make a usable image. With that being said I am always keeping an eye on my iso to make sure that my shutter speed and aperture are not hindering the cameras ability to capture the scene at an acceptable iso. You do need to understand a proper exposure to make youse of auto iso
I really appreciate this video, Simon! As a "hobby photographer", I was definitely in the category of "shoot everything at ISO 100 if you can". After watching your video just now, I'm now a changed man. 😎👍 Thank you!
My Nikon CoolPix P900 shoots between 100-6400 ISO, I never really had any lessons until after the first year, so I was always shooting over ISO 1000, because I didn't quite understand shutter speed and aperture. Fast forward a few years later, now I shoot between 200-800 for normal photos and don't edit my results anymore. I still use +1000 ISO for astro photography, but mostly for the moon and very few planets. I was never, nor am I currently afraid of high ISO, so when I learned that most KZhead channels tell you to stay between 100-400, I thought they were crazy. This is a refreshing change of pace, and definitely the reason I stick to your channel for inspiration and insight.
Forums are the worst, you always get people giving the most absolutist style statements, things like: “I NEVER shoot photos over 125 Iso, if you do you don’t know how to use a camera”
Manual mode and auto ISO is also my preferred combination. I often get worse results when I mess with the ISO settings and try to optimize them versus aperture and exposure time.
I’m super new to photography and I stumbled into that same thing by accident 😊 I thought I was cheating, thanks for a little vote of confidence
@@GoldenKnight702 using what the technology has to offer, especially the right way, is no reason for shame and far from "cheating", but i get your point, you're not alone, you're not the only one. if that was cheating, someone should have given a talk to the guys coming up with priority modes as well.. ..not to mention bringing up lights in the woods.. umbrellas.. ..how about auto-focus.. focus assist / peaking.. i'll stop :) BTW: if you're still "new to photography", don't miss the fact that Auto ISO is supposed to be used with a mindfully chosen max shutter speed (time) setting, look it up in the menu. some students in art school are still brainwashed into learning and perfecting the archaic means of painting.. as if the greats of the past looked forward for using what was less than what their time had to offer...
From what I learned you prioritize aperture and shutter speed according to the subject and adjust ISO accordingly as long as the noise level is still acceptable. Aperture = to get the target depth of field and hyperfocal distance. Shutter speed = to get the proper speed to capture. still, slow. or fast moving subjects. There is a limit where you just have to stop increasing the ISO because of the noise amplification and artifacts it produces and you just have to with slightly change/compromise the ideal shutter speed or aperture to get a balanced result.
100000 % right!!!!
Great advice Simon. I’ve been shooting in manual with auto ISO for years and love it. And, as a bonus, my camera, the Fujifilm X-T4, always chooses the lowest ISO, depending on the lighting quality. Camera manufacturers know what they’re doing when they design their latest cameras; we should trust them and not just listen to the advice of well meaning, but misinformed, other photographers. Great channel Simon. Keep the good advice coming!
I recently had that "aha" moment and I craked a smile during the video because of that. I am no professional photographer, I am just passionate about, a hobbyist. But man, that ISO100 was of my pillars until now, I was conviced that shooting over 100 or 200 is an awuful idea. It turns out that is not. Thanks, Simon!
Great explanation. I shoot weddings with mostly available light and I long embraced high ISOs as a necessary tool for my style of working
I’ve been shooting pro wrestling for the past few years. Understanding ISO has been integral in getting perfectly exposed action shots in challenging lighting conditions. This video is a great explainer for those who might be scared off bumping it up or relying on auto ISO, it’s really useful!
One thing that was missed was that you can balance ISO with a flash. In a dark environment you light a subject with the flash but also expose the environment using a higher ISO where the flash won’t reach
I started out years ago with Rangefinders and preferred ISO 100 Printing Film. I rarely shot action but do remember trying to push it fast anyway. I often got comments of image quality from others who had much better equipment and experience than I did at the time. I am slowly upgrading to better quality Digicams and typically use Auto because I am still getting used to digital. I always notice a fair bit of noise in the images and now I realize that it's possible to lower this and have better results. I've also learned that the hot shoe types can require the matching flash not just any electronic flash "because it fits" and they should be upfiring. Thanks Simon 😊
A lifetime of chasing ISO 100. Better late than never, Many thanks.
Great information Simon. I shoot with Olympus (Micro 4/3) and regularly shoot at high ISO. Yes, images can be noisy but Topaz does a wonderful job of correcting the issue. Thanks for your advice.
I agree. I have taken my OM-5 to ISO 6400 and, for family photos, got great results. Yes, Topaz DeNoise is very important in this space.
Best explanation for ISO Simon. When i started i came from landscape photography and ISO was hard grained to be 100. But these days, the noise removal apps, having more control of shutter speed to nail the shot and seeing the difference of not having the good speed for action has shown me proof that i had to let it go awhile ago, so happy i did. Excellent example of the seascape and landscape action shots.
One of the best, most useful and truthful photography videos on KZhead! It deserves repeated watching until knowing the script by heart! Terrific job !!! Thank you for busting the myth !
Glad you enjoyed it!
Auto ISO made my shooting so much easier. Like you said in your other videos, the ISO is like a messenger telling you that you need to get more light to the sensor. Great video as always!
It's amazing how big the difference is between a KZheadr and a real photographer! Flawless video, congratulations! As I leave the studio, i set aperture priority, auto-ISO and auto-shutter speed with manually selected minimum value. The latter eliminates motion blur (e.g. I don't let it go below 1/500 in auto-mode), but if suddenly "too much" light hits the sensor (light levels are constantly changing in an event shoot), the camera can instantly increase this value for the correct exposure.
This is the best and most informative photography video I've watched. You bring out the beauty of our province! After watching your video, I'll be more relaxed about ISO settings.
Simon, thank you for taking the time to make this video! You have a gift.
Only just recently learned that a properly exposed image has less noise then under exposed at the same ISO, i admit I was one of those people scared to go over 1600 ISO wheres now I just expose my image properly and can barely notice the noise. Also I have matured into photography and I actually like a little noise in the image, depending on the situation it can add character and make it more pleasing to the eye then a smooth image.
I got into this conversation with another KZhead photographer the other day. They were talking about "common mistakes new users make" or something along those lines. I told them that they (community, not just them specifically) needed to start rewording or rethinking what they were teaching others. High ISO isn't inherently bad and it's more to do with their usage of available or artificial lighting that was definitely important. But...not everyone, including myself, get everything right based off experience, but on what they're been told. I learned a lot of my skills the hard way lol
Wedding photographer here focused on documentary style. I have clients request zero flash at some events, in which case I use a Fuji with a prime (focused manually), B&W, and a sky high ISO. Often my clients love these pictures the most - but they also prefer the documentary style...my point is some niches love the look. You're dead right, it's better than no image at all.
The ISO setting made sense because I'd already done 3D modeling where I had to figure out the virtual camera settings when noise occurred. However the explanation and lots of tips like that for manual settings were very helpful.
Why no one told me about this before! I went through the whole season of northern lights, underexposing (still at like 1250 ISO) and getting crazy noise. I just made a quick test in dark room, and can confirm bumping up the ISO does work. Thank you very much for your advice!
Glad I could help!
Are you trying to say that higher ISO ends up with less noise assuming both shots are taken in identical conditions?
I work in networking fulltime (so im very familiar with the concept of SNR and it made ISO make sense to me almost imediately) but Im a photography and DP on the side. It blows my mind how widespread the misconception of ISO is. Its always refreshing watching your videos keep up the good work.
I recently stumbled upon your videos, they are simply fantastic. I've been a semi-intermediate hobbyist photographer for over years, and still learn new things from your videos. So well explained and good examples. Keep up the fantastic work, greetings from Finland! 🥰
Awesome, thank you!