How I used ISO higher than 800

[stevoarnold]

Following an article that was written and posted on the main page of this web site regarding indoor photography technique and advising against ISO over 800, I thought I would explain how I made this photo using ISO 3200.

The article can be viewed here :5 Tips for Consistently Good Photos Indoors

The particular advice that I am referring to is this: "I don’t care what the manufacturers say: any ISO above 800 is crap!"

Well, that was the authors opinion... The fact is that high ISO does not mean crap photos.

Here's how I made a nicely lit indoor photo using only window light:

1: Place my model near said window.
2: Set lowest f number to maximise the available light and increase the bokeh on the background
3: Set ISO fixed at 3200
4: Set White Balance to Cloudy
5: Position myself so that the light is hitting the model from an angle (as if coming from over my left shoulder). This results in pleasing shadows that increase the depth and 3D-ness of the image
6: Snap
7: import into lightroom and adjust noise reduction sliders, although at this viewing size the difference is negligible.


I did try to post this as a comment on the original article but i guess comments are locked or something as its not working. I just really dont want anybody to make the assumption that using ISO higher than 800 will result in "crap". I wouldnt be that bothered if it was just someone making their opinion known on the forum, but this opinion was given in a published article that in MY opinion should never have made it past the site administrator for a site called "Digital Photography School".


Full Exif details:
ISO: 3200
exposure: 1/400 sec
Aperture: F4
Focal Length: 82mm

[Nicole]

I agree with you, high ISO is not always crap. Especially if it's well exposed at the high ISO. I have no fear of using everything up to and including the highest ISO on my camera.

[KenRC51]

stevo, which camera did you use? I know if it was shoot on a full frame camera then the noise at 3200 ISO would be much less then if shoot with cropped sensor. BTW, very clear and noise free at 3200 ISO

[Glayva]

Who on earth suggested ISO over 800 in crap? With today's list of top quality cameras and chips, ISO's at much higher than 800 are well within the capabilities of producing acceptable photographs. Excellent noise (grain) reducing software, such as Noise Ninja, do excellent jobs. Anyway, who says a bit of grain is a bad thing?

And, Yes, this is an excellent example of a shot taken at high ISO. Well done and thanks for sharing

[jul]

I enjoyed your post and your model is particularly beautiful! :-)

[pratapsankar]

Yeah.. little higher ISO always gets a more crisp shot and give room to flex around in low light.. it also gives a more saturated look.. love it!

[OsmosisStudios]

When dealing with high iso, it's always better to over expose than under expose.

[cphoniball]

I agree, I thought that the "above 800 is crap", put out as a general statement, was terribly, terribly wrong.

That said, we've got to be fair about this example too. Yes, you can get good results at ISO 3200, if you properly expose the shot, and, perhaps more importantly, if you have a full frame or recent-generation camera with good high-iso performance. I know that if I took a shot at 3200 on my 40D (which is the H setting) I would have significant amounts of noise in my image. So, as with everything else in photography, it's circumstantial.

[Alstare]

As mentioned above...

The fact you shot this with a 5D mkII with some L glass, helps explain why your high ISO is considerably less "crap" then expected. This same shot with a 400d with a kit lens will produce considerably worse results.

But I do agree with your thoughts.. that saying anything above ISO 800 is crap is pretty big blanket statement to make!

[roshaoar]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

When dealing with high iso, it's always better to over expose than under expose.

Agreed, if you underexpose the shadows look incredibly noisy. Overexpose and use PP to bring the highlights down and you're usually onto more of a winner