Concepts Auto ISO or not AUTO ISO? That is the question for wildlife.

To indicate that this thread is a discussion of theoretical concepts
wiltw said:
My bias against Auto ISO is the fact that the camera can choose an unnecessarily high ISO, which is prone to greater noise content in the resulting image, when it could have used a more reasonable ISO with lower shutter speed. Are recently introduced cameras any better at the logic of ISO + shutter speed selection?!
Click to expand...
For at least the last decade... see my post above (#39)
 
Phil V said:
I find some of these arguments a bit bonkers. People talk about overriding auto settings as if an EV isn’t a fixed thing.
In any given situation (presuming the meter has correctly measured the light)
If I shoot M with auto ISO and choose f8 and 1/250, and the camera picks 1600
Or I choose AV and f8 with a min SS of 1/250

Or I pick TV a shutter speed of 1/250 and safety shift the aperture to f8 (I’ll get 1600)

Or I go full M and the settings are 1/250, f8 and 1600

It’s exactly the same bloody image.

If the meter is wrong, it’s still wrong whether AV, TV, or M, and whether the ISO was set by me or the camera.

The exposure triangle is 3 variables that equate to an EV. Whether one or all of them are auto or manually selected is a choice of working method, makes no difference to the result

Edit - clearly cross posted with the above.
Click to expand...
I'm well aware of the exposure triangle... Different work flows and preference in handling the camera comes into effect too but in the interests of explaining I'm not "bonkers" I'll expand:

In all those scenarios you've described I think you're going by the metered exposure which is an assumption that I am. I rarely compose and go for that. I shoot mainly landscapes and if I switch to Aperture priority, I'll nail the ISO to the base number (64 on the full frame, 100 on the medium format), then I'll adjust everything else for composition/creativity. I'll push it a stop or two under meter to make sure I'm exposing for the right etc... I'm almost always on a tripod anyway. It's a perfectly bona fide method of shooting. Of course you CAN use Auto ISO for that but if the machine decides a high is the best way to go it just gives me needless noise reduction to do in post later. I want to control that. Other opinions are available.
 
Last edited:
Typhoon7 said:
I'm well aware of the exposure triangle... Different work flows and preference in handling the camera comes into effect too but in the interests of explaining I'm not "bonkers" I'll expand:

In all those scenarios you've described you're going by the metered exposure which is an assumption that I am. I rarely compose and go for that. I shoot mainly landscapes and if I switch to Aperture priority, I'll nail the ISO to the base number (64 on the full frame, 100 on the medium format), then I'll adjust everything else for composition/creativity. I'll push it a stop or two under meter to make sure I'm exposing for the right etc... I'm almost always on a tripod anyway. It's a perfectly bona fide method of shooting. Of course you CAN use Auto ISO for that but if the machine decides a high is the best way to go it just gives me needless noise reduction to do in post later. I want to control that. Other opinions are available.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t suggesting you were bonkers, just for clarity.

(Well not for your previous post-but being a landscape shooter reopens the question )

There’s nowt in your post here that you couldn’t achieve with other methods. You’re right, but it’s also what I posted, it’s all a different method to get the same result. If you’re choosing a stop under, and the same SS and aperture, you’ll get the same ISO.

Y’ say you ‘understand’ but still seem to believe that it’s not a simple fixed thing. And it is. A fixed amount of light gives you some variables and whichever one is most important to you, you can aim for. I use a tripod only under duress, and rarely feel the need for NR, but that’s cos I’m making pictures rather than obsessing over the irrelevant;)
 
Typhoon7 said:
I'm well aware of the exposure triangle... Different work flows and preference in handling the camera comes into effect too but in the interests of explaining I'm not "bonkers" I'll expand:

In all those scenarios you've described you're going by the metered exposure which is an assumption that I am. I rarely compose and go for that. I shoot mainly landscapes and if I switch to Aperture priority, I'll nail the ISO to the base number (64 on the full frame, 100 on the medium format), then I'll adjust everything else for composition/creativity. I'll push it a stop or two under meter to make sure I'm exposing for the right etc... I'm almost always on a tripod anyway. It's a perfectly bona fide method of shooting. Of course you CAN use Auto ISO for that but if the machine decides a high is the best way to go it just gives me needless noise reduction to do in post later. I want to control that. Other opinions are available.
Click to expand...
If the camera uses a higher ISO than needed the only potential negative side effect is blown highlights. And if you use -EC to protect the highlights, then that will reduce the ISO if that is what the camera is in control of.

With a non-invariant camera using a higher ISO results in reduced noise. With a (nearly) invariant camera it makes no difference... other than blown highlights.

But there are a half dozen ways to accomplish anything...
 
So in summary there's nothing wrong with using auto ISO, manual, or a priority mode with fixed ISO as long as it gets you to the exposure you want in the way you prefer.

I think we can all agree on that.

It's like manual vs auto transmissions. Neither is right or wrong and I think much of this is how each of us prefer to handle the camera.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
I wasn’t suggesting you were bonkers, just for clarity.

(Well not for your previous post-but being a landscape shooter reopens the question )

There’s nowt in your post here that you couldn’t achieve with other methods. You’re right, but it’s also what I posted, it’s all a different method to get the same result. If you’re choosing a stop under, and the same SS and aperture, you’ll get the same ISO.

Y’ say you ‘understand’ but still seem to believe that it’s not a simple fixed thing. And it is. A fixed amount of light gives you some variables and whichever one is most important to you, you can aim for. I use a tripod only under duress, and rarely feel the need for NR, but that’s cos I’m making pictures rather than obsessing over the irrelevant;)
Click to expand...
Aye I do know what you're saying don't worry. I just don't like getting there the same way you do. Like I said I have a setting bank on the Nikon that is Auto ISO (for the occasional bird/deer shot I go for whilst out in the wild) and it works fine for that. It's just not my go to for landscapes - personal preference for 30 years of shooting.
 
Typhoon7 said:
So in summary there's nothing wrong with using auto ISO, manual, or a priority mode with fixed ISO as long as it gets you to the exposure you want in the way you prefer.

I think we can all agree on that.

It's like manual vs auto transmissions. Neither is right or wrong and I think much of this is how each of us prefer to handle the camera.
Click to expand...
Do you also like to manually control the ignition timing (common pre war) manual choke (common into the 80’s) and eschew auto valve timing (unavailable till the late 80’s, not common till much later).

When I was a kid I had to manually tune the tv to get a different station. But being able to press a button from my sofa is a much improved experience.

I understand people making choices, but pretending you’re ’in control’ when you’ve no idea what the technology is already doing for you just starts to look a bit daft ;) and ‘manual transmission’ falls into that category from an automotive perspective. I bet your car has lane change indicators, auto lights and wipers, and god knows what else. Mine actually alters the headlight pattern dependant on road conditions. And I’ve driven cars where the main / dip switch was a foot control that could be used by the passenger.
 
Typhoon7 said:
Aye I do know what you're saying don't worry. I just don't like getting there the same way you do. Like I said I have a setting bank on the Nikon that is Auto ISO (for the occasional bird/deer shot I go for whilst out in the wild) and it works fine for that. It's just not my go to for landscapes - personal preference for 30 years of shooting.
Click to expand...
I haven’t said how I do ;)
 
Phil V said:
Do you also like to manually control the ignition timing (common pre war) manual choke (common into the 80’s) and eschew auto valve timing (unavailable till the late 80’s, not common till much later).

When I was a kid I had to manually tune the tv to get a different station. But being able to press a button from my sofa is a much improved experience.

I understand people making choices, but pretending you’re ’in control’ when you’ve no idea what the technology is already doing for you just starts to look a bit daft ;) and ‘manual transmission’ falls into that category from an automotive perspective. I bet your car has lane change indicators, auto lights and wipers, and god knows what else. Mine actually alters the headlight pattern dependant on road conditions. And I’ve driven cars where the main / dip switch was a foot control that could be used by the passenger.
Click to expand...
This is funny... No I don't have any of those things. I drive an old Toyota Hilux with no lane change, no automatic wipers, no parking sensors, no android auto or whatever.... It has a live axle and leaf springs for crying out loud. To shift it into low-range I don't press a button like modern 4x4s, I move a lever which I can feel moving a heavy mechanism with a reassuring clunk under the floor. Lovely.

I think the thing about controlling the ignition timing is a wee bit of reductio ad absurdum though... This isn't either of those things. Modern cars don't have that but modern cameras do have full manual control because many of us like using it.
 
Last edited:
Typhoon7 said:
Aye I do know what you're saying don't worry. I just don't like getting there the same way you do. Like I said I have a setting bank on the Nikon that is Auto ISO (for the occasional bird/deer shot I go for whilst out in the wild) and it works fine for that. It's just not my go to for landscapes - personal preference for 30 years of shooting.
Click to expand...
Well, the original question was in regards to wildlife photography... and the same could be said for anything action related/highly variable.

That's not to say there is anything wrong with full manual... sometimes it's just easier; it's my fall back for anytime I'm not getting the results I want for whatever reason (usually operator error).
 
Typhoon7 said:
This is funny... No I don't have any of those things. I drive an old Toyota Hilux with no lane change, no automatic wipers, no parking sensors, no android auto or whatever.... It has a live axle and leaf springs for crying out loud. To shift it into low-range I don't press a button like modern 4x4s, I move a lever which I can feel moving a heavy mechanism with a reassuring clunk under the floor. Lovely. I have a degree in automotive engineering and have worked as a design engineer in F1, IndyCar and Le Mans. Many assume I would drive a hi tech post-modernistic PlayStation on wheels like a GT-R but just the opposite.

I think the thing about controlling the ignition timing is a wee bit of reductio ad absurdum though... This isn't either of those things. Modern cars don't have that but modern cameras do have full manual control because many of us like using it.
Click to expand...
And you manually adjust the ignition timing, valve timing, manual choke?
Servo on your brakes?
Power steering?

Like I say, it’s easy to ignore the tech we lean on. ;)
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
And you manually adjust the ignition timing, valve timing, manual choke?
Servo on your brakes?
Power steering?

Like I say, it’s easy to ignore the tech we lean on.
Click to expand...
The reductio ad absurdum rides again! My camera doesn't need me to wind the film on with a lever manually either if we play that game. No I don't ignore the tech at all and never stated that I did. I choose to use the tech available to me in the way I prefer. I prefer shooting with manually controlled ISO over auto ISO, That's been my point all along but as this is primarily for wildlife and I'm mostly a landscape shooter, my view will be somewhat irrelevant and I'd imagine in the minority for those who shoot animals mostly for which auto ISO is brilliant.
 
Last edited:
Faldrax said:
Careful, there's a whole new set of arguments about cameras with / without grips :LOL:
Click to expand...
Well now you mention it I do have a battery grip for the A7 iv but found it made the camera heavy and didn't have a button to change the ISO ;)
 
Russell,

If you're using Sony then the easiest way to get correct exposures each time is to use the zebra function. Honestly, you can't go wrong. Top dials for shutter and aperture and change your rear dial to ISO and once they're set up properly you literally can't miss.

If you're interested I'll let you know the best way to set them up

Mike
 
I never use zebras as I find them too distracting.

I see the reasoning and the need not to have large areas blown but there are other ways of protecting the highlights if that's what you decide to do.
 
I always use manual settings. Because I want the object to be correctly exposed, whether the background is dark or light.
Modern cameras make this very easy. I have a dedicated dial for changing iso. And I use it more often than speed and aperture. Everything is written in the viewfinder and I don't need to check the final photograph because the electronic viewfinder recreates the brightness of the frame in real time.
Moreover, I even use manual white balance. If in the post processing it is necessary to merge frames.
 
pooley said:
Russell,

If you're using Sony then the easiest way to get correct exposures each time is to use the zebra function. Honestly, you can't go wrong. Top dials for shutter and aperture and change your rear dial to ISO and once they're set up properly you literally can't miss.

If you're interested I'll let you know the best way to set them up

Mike
Click to expand...
Hi Mike, thank you for the offer, I do no how to set them up (but the best way?) but must admit never really given them a chance if I am honest, with looking at shutter, aperture, histogram,exposure compensation and ISO then trying to frame the subject that is mostly jumping around (small birds) zebras kind of vanish from the mind. But any suggestions to make life easier always welcome(y) Russ.
 
russellsnr said:
Hi Mike, thank you for the offer, I do no how to set them up (but the best way?) but must admit never really given them a chance if I am honest, with looking at shutter, aperture, histogram,exposure compensation and ISO then trying to frame the subject that is mostly jumping around (small birds) zebras kind of vanish from the mind. But any suggestions to make life easier always welcome(y) Russ.
Click to expand...
To me , shooting RAW, they are the best things since sliced bread for getting a spot on exposure.

I accept they can be a distraction but once you get used to the visuals in the viewfinder they are brilliant.

My setup is shutter button for AF, I don't see the need for back button focus. Front dial is for shutter speeds, the second dial is for aperture, which most of the times the Uk is simply left to wide open!

The rear dial on the back of the camera is set to change the ISO, and I have a custom limit set for the zebras at 107,

I have my shutter speed set according to the anticipated action, then simply turn the rear ISO dial until the zebras just about fade off the subject. That leaves me with perfectly exposed subject, exposed to the right of the histogram with no blown highlights.

Handling the camera is easy then as my forefinger deals with the AF and my thumb effectively deals with the exposure. Both are in natural positions and its about as uncomplicated as can be.

Mike
 
I was converted to using manual mode with auto-ISO for wildlife shooting several years ago and can see no downside to using it. When composing an image I set the shutter speed and aperture I want and then want to concentrate on the composition so the camera can do what it needs to do to get me a properly exposed shot. I'll deal with whatever it chose for ISO later. If I am going to shoot a series of images from the same location then I will check my first image and adjust the EC if needed which, on my Nikon D780, raises or lowers the ISO accordingly.

I now find that I use manual with auto-ISO for everything else too :)
 
russellsnr said:
Hi, so a while ago after watching a video on AUTO ISO I fell into the trap of using it all the time (lazy or not?) along with exposure compensation in M mode after meeting another photographer while out and about I asked what setting they used and the answer some what surprised me " Manual mode for everything, never use AUTO ISO" so my question is "When or do you use AUTO ISO or are you full manual throughout"? "If full manual throughout what do you feel that the benefits are if any over AUTO ISO"?
Thanks, Russ.
Click to expand...
I use auto ISO in manual a lot. The variables I generally want to control are aperture and shutter speed, the ISO is then dictated by these variables so why not just let the camera take care of it, especially when you’re panning when shooting sports and wildlife.

There are of course times where full manual is more appropriate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top