I was using Canon R5 recently. With the same exposure, at ISO 200 setting the noise in shadows was worse than at ISO 100. Raw files become fully manageable at ISO 800.
I was using Canon R5 recently. With the same exposure, at ISO 200 setting the noise in shadows was worse than at ISO 100. Raw files become fully manageable at ISO 800.
@ErikWithaK has written:most sensors are largely “ISO invariant” these days
actually they are NOT ... there was a short time ( between ADC off sensor and advent of dual-gain sensors), but not anymore
Which aren’t? While most sensors are more invariant beyond the dual-gain threshold overall, I would still consider them “largely” invariant (at least the ones I’m familiar with). If you require maximum DR, using an ISO setting below the dual-gain point in very low light can still be of great benefit.
@xpatUSA has written: @deejjjaaaa has written:I'd still write : that after exposure settings are decided the next decision shall be about nominal ISO settings to dial in ( before the actual exposure process starts )
Interesting. So, if I decide that f/5.6 at 1/60sec is a perfect exposure setting for my sensor and that lighting, why would I have to decide a different "ISO setting to dial in"?
you have to have some ISO dialed in so what did you dial in ( setting auto-ISO count as such decision too ) and WHY ? may be your exposure settings were bare minumum to keep subject motion blur acceptable and get whatever you want into acceptable DOF - but your exposure was in the best exposed channel like 5 stops to clipping ? are you dialing in lowest nominal ISO ? 2nd base nominal ISO in dual gain camera ? max ISO using some auto-ISO range.. surely you are not flipping a coin... more so - I argue that you decide about a nominal ISO even before deciding about exact exposure parameters in a situation when you after some action ( not like shooting static scene w/ plenty time to spare), not after ...
Sorry, I decline to answer the rhetorical questions.
In your OP, you said that AFTER exposure settings are decided, the NEXT decision shall be about nominal ISO settings to dial in.
now you argue that you decide about a nominal ISO EVEN BEFORE deciding about exact exposure parameters.
I do hope that beginners will understand WHY these opposing statements were made ...
@deejjjaaaa has written: @ErikWithaK has written:most sensors are largely “ISO invariant” these days
actually they are NOT ... there was a short time ( between ADC off sensor and advent of dual-gain sensors), but not anymore
Which aren’t? While most sensors are more invariant beyond the dual-gain threshold overall, I would still consider them “largely” invariant (at least the ones I’m familiar with). If you require maximum DR, using an ISO setting below the dual-gain point in very low light can still be of great benefit.
Pentax K-3 III and Pentax K-1 II:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm#Pentax%20K-1%20II_14,Pentax%20K-3%20III_14
@deejjjaaaa has written: @ErikWithaK has written:most sensors are largely “ISO invariant” these days
actually they are NOT ... there was a short time ( between ADC off sensor and advent of dual-gain sensors), but not anymore
Which aren’t? While most sensors are more invariant beyond the dual-gain threshold overall, I would still consider them “largely” invariant (at least the ones I’m familiar with). If you require maximum DR, using an ISO setting below the dual-gain point in very low light can still be of great benefit.
they are either invariant or not - and in practical terms dual gain sensors sufficiently not invariant - unless you start to narrow things down to : oh,yes - between these 2 nominal settings ISO1600 and ISO3200 they are, thus excluding away parts that not suit you ... come on
@JimKasson has written:I've written an article on how to get well-exposed raw files for the Lensrentals blog. It's being published in two parts. The second part, which will be published next week, has examples, some more technical discussion, and a glossary.
The article is pitched at intermediate photographers who are already shooting raw and want to know how to get the best exposure settings. It's not aimed at beginners, nor is it targeted to experts.
Woo! :-)
@JimKasson has written:If you have any questions or comments, I can deal with them in this thread.
I think a square root got lost here:
Quoted message:The standard deviation of the electrons is also the root mean square (RMS) measure of the noise. Reducing the above to an equation:
RMS noise = Number of electrons counted
Later, we get:
You are correct. the radical got lost in translation. I've notified Lensrentals.
Thanks.
@davidwien has written:Jim,
Thanks! I find this a more easy to absorb explanation of exposure than I ever got from the big thread here. However, I get lost in the ISO part, as it doesnt tell me why I should set any particular value for it in order to get a better raw file.
David
I think you will probably be best off simply considering exposure and ISO independently. Make every effort to maximize the exposure (Light+Aperture+SS) - always satisfying any DOF, and motion blur requirements, and then consider ISO.
Whether you’re shooting full manual or semi-Auto with exposure compensation, once exposure is dealt with, if base ISO is going to result in some shortfall in brightness, you will then need to decide how much additional ISO is needed to get the job done…
For jpeg shooters, if there isn’t enough light to fully saturate the sensor at base ISO, you’re going to want to increase the ISO value to achieve the desired image brightness in-camera without clipping any important highlight detail. There are also some other options to consider - DR modes etc., but those are best left for a separate discussion.
For raw shooters, it could be much the same thing, but as most sensors are largely “ISO invariant” these days, you also have the option (for numerous reasons that we can discuss separately) of deferring some, or all, of the in-camera “brightening” (for lack of a better word) that the ISO setting represents, and applying (again, some or all) of any necessary “brightening” in post instead.
I am onkly interested in the raw file.
I set aperture and exposure.
I then have to set ISO. But how do I determine the optimum value for this?
David
Jim, I just started to read your article and I got to this bit:
The standard deviation of the electrons is also the root mean square (RMS) measure of the noise. Reducing the above to an equation:
RMS noise = Number of electrons countedBut the equation does not say what the text is. The text says "The standard deviation of the electrons is also the root mean square (RMS) measure of the noise."
But that is not the number of electrons counted. or is it? If it is, how is the standard deviation of the electrons= the number of electrons counted? I am confusedAlan
The Lensrentals folks left out the radical. Here's what it is supposed to look like:
I've notified them and hopefully they'll fix it soon.
JIm,
In the wikipedia definition of exposure, near the beginning of your article, there must be an "of" missing in the first line (amount of light).
David
@ErikWithaK has written: @davidwien has written:Jim,
Thanks! I find this a more easy to absorb explanation of exposure than I ever got from the big thread here. However, I get lost in the ISO part, as it doesnt tell me why I should set any particular value for it in order to get a better raw file.
David
I think you will probably be best off simply considering exposure and ISO independently. Make every effort to maximize the exposure (Light+Aperture+SS) - always satisfying any DOF, and motion blur requirements, and then consider ISO.
Whether you’re shooting full manual or semi-Auto with exposure compensation, once exposure is dealt with, if base ISO is going to result in some shortfall in brightness, you will then need to decide how much additional ISO is needed to get the job done…
For jpeg shooters, if there isn’t enough light to fully saturate the sensor at base ISO, you’re going to want to increase the ISO value to achieve the desired image brightness in-camera without clipping any important highlight detail. There are also some other options to consider - DR modes etc., but those are best left for a separate discussion.
For raw shooters, it could be much the same thing, but as most sensors are largely “ISO invariant” these days, you also have the option (for numerous reasons that we can discuss separately) of deferring some, or all, of the in-camera “brightening” (for lack of a better word) that the ISO setting represents, and applying (again, some or all) of any necessary “brightening” in post instead.
I am onkly interested in the raw file.
I set aperture and exposure.
I then have to set ISO. But how do I determine the optimum value for this?
David
you check BClaff site for a start (unless you can DIY the same) and then you test yourself though raw conversion - because graphs might still lie to you apparently ( see @IliahBorg about R5)
JIm,
In the wikipedia definition of exposure, near the beginning of your article, there must be an "of" missing in the first line (amount of light).
David
Thanks. I've asked them to make the change.
I am onkly interested in the raw file.
I set aperture and exposure.
I then have to set ISO. But how do I determine the optimum value for this?
Set it at base ISO with an ETTR exposure if you can.
If you want to lower read noise, have a brighter finder image, or avoid extreme pushes in your raw developer, raise it a bit, but don't get greedy and run the risk of highlight clipping. The details depend on your camera.
@deejjjaaaa has written: @xpatUSA has written: @deejjjaaaa has written:I'd still write : that after exposure settings are decided the next decision shall be about nominal ISO settings to dial in ( before the actual exposure process starts )
Interesting. So, if I decide that f/5.6 at 1/60sec is a perfect exposure setting for my sensor and that lighting, why would I have to decide a different "ISO setting to dial in"?
you have to have some ISO dialed in so what did you dial in ( setting auto-ISO count as such decision too ) and WHY ? may be your exposure settings were bare minumum to keep subject motion blur acceptable and get whatever you want into acceptable DOF - but your exposure was in the best exposed channel like 5 stops to clipping ? are you dialing in lowest nominal ISO ? 2nd base nominal ISO in dual gain camera ? max ISO using some auto-ISO range.. surely you are not flipping a coin... more so - I argue that you decide about a nominal ISO even before deciding about exact exposure parameters in a situation when you after some action ( not like shooting static scene w/ plenty time to spare), not after ...
Sorry, I decline to answer the rhetorical questions.
In your OP, you said that AFTER exposure settings are decided, the NEXT decision shall be about nominal ISO settings to dial in.
now you argue that you decide about a nominal ISO EVEN BEFORE deciding about exact exposure parameters.
I do hope that beginners will understand WHY these opposing statements were made ...
they are not opposing
in an ideal scenario, when I have time/etc, I will decide AFTER ... but in a practical case I do decide BEFORE ( because I might not have time to decide precisely - so for example I select a certain Auto ISO before I start using M mode ) ... ISO not part of exposure ( process, from when exposure of a photo-site/sensel starts till that exposure ends ), but knowing how it affects the raw files (and raw processing using your specific raw converter and not abstract ideal something) becoming a part of your decision about exposure parameters to dial in ( aperture, exposure time and if you control the light, like strobes/etc - that too ) ... in that sense "ISO" still hangs around "exposure"
in an ideal scenario, when I have time/etc, I will decide AFTER ... but in a practical case I do decide BEFORE ( because I might not have time to decide precisely - so for example I select a certain Auto ISO before I start using M mode ) ... ISO not part of exposure ( process, from when exposure of a photo-site/sensel starts till that exposure ends ), but knowing how it affects the raw files (and raw processing using your specific raw converter and not abstract ideal something) becoming a part of your decision about exposure parameters to dial in ( aperture, exposure time and if you control the light, like strobes/etc - that too ) ... in that sense "ISO" still hangs around "exposure"
I don't' use auto ISO, but in the past seven or eight years I have not been in a situation where I picked my exposure based on the ISO setting I wanted to use.
@deejjjaaaa has written:in an ideal scenario, when I have time/etc, I will decide AFTER ... but in a practical case I do decide BEFORE ( because I might not have time to decide precisely - so for example I select a certain Auto ISO before I start using M mode ) ... ISO not part of exposure ( process, from when exposure of a photo-site/sensel starts till that exposure ends ), but knowing how it affects the raw files (and raw processing using your specific raw converter and not abstract ideal something) becoming a part of your decision about exposure parameters to dial in ( aperture, exposure time and if you control the light, like strobes/etc - that too ) ... in that sense "ISO" still hangs around "exposure"
I don't' use auto ISO, but in the past seven or eight years I have not been in a situation where I picked my exposure based on the ISO setting I wanted to use.
I use Auto ISO and I select it once before moving to shot in M mode during some party time where I am also a part of that fun ( because I rather not fond of selecting like 2nd base ISO and pushing in raw converter or something along the lines ) - in that sense I am picking my exposure AFTER I decided about a nominal ISO ( that is I set limits for a camera to assist me and decide about the exact nominal ISO value within said limits understanding that it might not be all ideal and yes I might adjust some exposure parameters - but not auto ISO limits because that is way suits me - with what I like to do later w/ raw files in raw conversion ) - does not mean "based" on it the sense I feel you want to put in it
and if I move to use a strobe in middle because my friends want to have some posed photos under a good light then I do decide to use either a 1st base ISO or 2nd base ISO and that's it.... I will change aperture ( to get more or less people/faces/etc in DOF ), but not ISO - that I decide before based on the idea how much illumination I can deliver, etc ... so I do not change a nominal ISO after adjusting aperture/power output etc ... it is practical situation... does not matter that I agree w/ all ISO not part of exposure - it is just the way it goes in the real life
What would make it a darn sight easier would be raw histograms. Here we are in 2023 and I cannot think of one camera company that has given this. It is pretty lazy of them, but as far as i can see they are more often than not about small evolutionary changes rather than revolution. We are still seeing a histogram based of if a jpg on the back of our cameras in this day and age. Hardly a great tool for data collection...
Jim...the blackjack analogy perfectly describes the situation.
who said they havnt ? all cameras histograms are calibrated on the safe side of clipping thats all. plug a field monitor into your camera and see what a very detailed histogram looks like compared to say raw digger. on my sony a74 you can calibrate the cameras metering system and also the histogram/blinkies clipping warnings. been there done that and reset the camera back to default settings for 1/3 stop head room.
all cameras histograms are calibrated on the safe side of clipping thats all
Safe side - like minus one and more stops?
www.fastrawviewer.com/culling-raw-vs-jpegs
@primeshooter has written:What would make it a darn sight easier would be raw histograms. Here we are in 2023 and I cannot think of one camera company that has given this. It is pretty lazy of them, but as far as i can see they are more often than not about small evolutionary changes rather than revolution. We are still seeing a histogram based of if a jpg on the back of our cameras in this day and age. Hardly a great tool for data collection...
Jim...the blackjack analogy perfectly describes the situation.
who said they havnt ? all cameras histograms are calibrated on the safe side of clipping thats all. plug a field monitor into your camera and see what a very detailed histogram looks like compared to say raw digger. on my sony a74 you can calibrate the cameras metering system and also the histogram/blinkies clipping warnings. been there done that and reset the camera back to default settings for 1/3 stop head room.
Because they haven't.