It’s not actually an abbreviation.
https://www.nickcarverphotography.com/blog/tag/how-to-pronounce-iso/
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Who uses aperture priority?
- Thread starter JamesMay82
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s not actually an abbreviation.
https://www.nickcarverphotography.com/blog/tag/how-to-pronounce-iso/
ISO = In Search Of (light).It’s not actually an abbreviation.
https://www.nickcarverphotography.com/blog/tag/how-to-pronounce-iso/
Likewise with me. I never really bother with any other mode when I'm out in the field shooting. I generally only adjust aperture, ISO and exposure compensation, based on my review of the previous image I took (I'm mainly a cityscape/landscape guy). But that's just my own preference.
It’s not actually an abbreviation.
https://www.nickcarverphotography.com/blog/tag/how-to-pronounce-iso/
Thanks-I guess that's what happens when you assume.
It doesn't change that anything other than I-S-O sounds wrong to me, though
.TAV mode on Pentax is the most useful I've found in most situations by a long shot. You manually set your own aperture and shutter speed and ISO is on auto. I assume you can accomplish the same thing on other brands such as Canon by using manual and having the ISO to auto. When you think about this it makes sense. ISO is the least important thing you need to be worried about in most scenarios outside of reaching upper limits for a given camera and cameras today especially full frame handle high ISO very easy.
Thought it referred to a light sensitivity characteristic for photosensitive films standardised by the ISO (International Standards Organisation). Might be wrong though.It’s not actually an abbreviation.
https://www.nickcarverphotography.com/blog/tag/how-to-pronounce-iso/
That’s what they said in the video. I’ve got no idea which is right though.
The link to the blog and the video in that link are pretty clear. Not sure if AFB is referring to a different video.
I was referring to this one I posted
But like I said I’m not really sure which is correct.
But the guy in your video says eye-so and also refers to the International Organization for Standardization. So they agree, unless he changes course midway through the video.
Imagine that you had set up your camera inappropriately, and a day's worth of photos were captured at 10,000 ISO. Nothing about the subject matter would lead you to believe that 1/8000s shutter speeds were necessary. Nor was it temporally unique. Would you be disappointed in your carelessness and proceed to reshoot? Or could you publish sell, or submit them without any regrets?
If your camera is that good, maybe you don't need to worry about ISO. My own camera is pretty noisy at ISO 6400-- though this does depend on the lens, strangely enough.
The first thing that I consider is whether I can shoot at a digital camera's native ISO, and I'm very conscious of deviations from it and by how much.
Doesn't mean that I don't do it. Even with film, I'll push by a couple of stops if I have to, but I go into it knowing the consequences.
Maybe it's because I use a handheld light meter, which I prefer because I like to use incident light readings. The first thing that you do with a light meter is enter an ISO value. With mine, you can also enter an alternate ISO.
Doesn't mean that I don't do it. Even with film, I'll push by a couple of stops if I have to, but I go into it knowing the consequences.
Maybe it's because I use a handheld light meter, which I prefer because I like to use incident light readings. The first thing that you do with a light meter is enter an ISO value. With mine, you can also enter an alternate ISO.
Last edited:
If you don't know what you are doing then sure that scenario might play out. When shooting TAV it is making the assumption you have some kind of awareness about the ISO(which is display during shooting) and some awareness of what happens when you shoot at 1/8000s in low light. How much you need to pay attention will be correlated to your camera capabilities and the ultimate output(is this critical work that will be displayed on a huge print at a high PPI or something you are putting on Instagram)
Speak of the devil. Uploaded today by FStoppers, tests on using different ISOs on the same scene (apparently now going under the trendy name “ISO Invariance”):
This is the same company that was pushing me to buy The Hero Shot.
Anyway, I thought it interesting that we were treated to an essentially monochrome portion of the photograph-- which in turn wasn't up to the standard of the Hero Shot.
There isn't a successful privately owned channel on YouTube that isn't selling stuff. At least this video is based on doing some tests. I'll take FStoppers any day of the week over the guy who made the video linked in post #48.
Last edited:
I dunno about trendy, but it's more than just selecting different ISO settings while keeping aperture and shutter speed invariant; ie it's this: "If your camera sensor is perfectly ISO invariant, there is no penalty in noise if you brighten a photo in post-production rather than increasing your ISO in-camera." That's from a this article, which does a better job of explaining it than the fstoppers or Northrup's videos IMHO: https://photographylife.com/iso-invariance-explained
Another good explanation here, especially for folks that do astro, and it discusses ISO variant cameras as well: https://www.lonelyspeck.com/how-to-...otography-dynamic-range-and-noise/#more-84388
And finally, if you wanna see an ISO invariance test of your own camera, then this (assuming DPR has tested it): https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/im...ion=full&widget=487&x=0.151173145&y=0.5005349
No. It's just that I wasn't impressed by the picture of the drill. And the existence of "The Hero Shot" implies that they know (or can learn) how to do product photography.
Moreover, I suspect that the majority of their audience can't judge a product photo at a high standard. They don't know what to look for.
DxoMark's review of the D850 is here.
https://www.dxomark.com/nikon-d850-sensor-review-first-dslr-hit-100-points/
The plots of Color Depth, Dynamic Range, and Color Sensitivity suggest that the subject matter isn't an appropriate test for color sensitivity, or dynamic range.
I do know about trendy, including when it exceeds my tolerance for prepubescent "English".
Won't even bother with the links.
Last edited:
Canon's sensors don't do so well in that test. The Nikon D3400 acquires a green cast, but the other nikon cameras seem to hold their own.
I always feel a bit befuddled when it comes to judging the "portraits".
Unless you fancy yourself an expert on product photography, is it really necessary to talk down about other people on the subject?
Last edited:
Do you understand what the photographer is trying to do in this video-- not just "he's trying to get rid of reflections", but how each bit of foamboard improves the shot?
I don't. It looks like it requires a lot of specialized equipment, technique, and craft.
And, yet, the end result looks like it could sell the product. When I see the drill, it doesn't scream "BUY ME"-- and I don't have the artistic experience to understand what sort of improvements can bring it to that next level.
Conversely, when some photography lesson shows a portrait, I can judge the photograph-- and the technique, and the equipment. I know where to find the flaws and the artistry.
Sorry; I presumed you might be interested to learn it's an engineering concept, and not some fad marketing concept. But I grant the articles are rather technical, and not for everyone.