20D @ 1600 ISO !!!

Patrick L. wrote:

"Annika1980" wrote in message
...

Here's a test shot I took of The Mighty Jewel tonight using only

available

light (from a ceiling fan). This is an actual-sized crop, but it's still a

big

file.

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34174309/original

1/25 @ f/11, 1600 ISO






What's the point of ISO 1600, if ambient light is enough for F/11?. Find
some ambient light that requires 1/25 sec, at F/2 or f/2.8, and ISO 1600 or
ISO 3200.

Then let's see the results. In my view, there is only one reason to use
ISO 1600 or ISO 3200; when light is so low you have to. Therefore, only
such light is relevant testing. as far as I'm concerned.

I (and others?) asked Bret to post shots at higher ISO's in order to see the noise.

Low light shooting, further, does not _demand_ a sacrifice in DOF either.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

In message QeY4d.34216$aW5.2999@fed1read07,
"Skip M" wrote:

How about a daytime sky? Fast shutter and aperture, but there's a wide
expanse of sky for noise to show up in.

http://www.shutterspeedway.com/cgi-b...es&p icture=4

How much of a crop is that?

If it is not a crop, why are you demonstrated noise with an image that
is downsampled? That would only show how well the noise downsamples.
--


John P Sheehy

"Skip M" wrote in message news:FbY4d.34215$aW5.6014@fed1read07...

Depth of field and sharpness of image are both very good reasons to shoot at
f11 and 1/25. Most lenses are not at their best wide open, f8 and f11 are
usually better choices, if you can do it. And, of course, depth of field is
greater at f11 than it is at f2.8.

Increasing ISO will never increase overall optical quality, even if
the lens performs a little better stopped down.

"Skip M" wrote in message news:FbY4d.34215$aW5.6014@fed1read07...

Depth of field and sharpness of image are both very good reasons to shoot at
f11 and 1/25. Most lenses are not at their best wide open, f8 and f11 are
usually better choices, if you can do it. And, of course, depth of field is
greater at f11 than it is at f2.8.

Increasing ISO will never increase overall optical quality, even if
the lens performs a little better stopped down.

(Annika1980) wrote in message ...
Here's a test shot I took of The Mighty Jewel tonight using only available
light (from a ceiling fan). This is an actual-sized crop, but it's still a big
file.

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34174309/original

1/25 @ f/11, 1600 ISO

Wow that looks like a P&S.

Georgette Preddy wrote:
"Skip M" wrote in message news:FbY4d.34215$aW5.6014@fed1read07...


Depth of field and sharpness of image are both very good reasons to shoot at
f11 and 1/25. Most lenses are not at their best wide open, f8 and f11 are
usually better choices, if you can do it. And, of course, depth of field is
greater at f11 than it is at f2.8.


Increasing ISO will never increase overall optical quality, even if
the lens performs a little better stopped down.

More idiocy from a familiar source.

"Phil Wheeler" wrote in message
...


Georgette Preddy wrote:
"Skip M" wrote in message
news:FbY4d.34215$aW5.6014@fed1read07...


Depth of field and sharpness of image are both very good reasons to shoot
at
f11 and 1/25. Most lenses are not at their best wide open, f8 and f11
are
usually better choices, if you can do it. And, of course, depth of field
is
greater at f11 than it is at f2.8.


Increasing ISO will never increase overall optical quality, even if
the lens performs a little better stopped down.

More idiocy from a familiar source.


Haven't you all killfiled him yet? If you all didn't respond, I would have
less noise.

S.

"Phil Wheeler" wrote in message
...


Georgette Preddy wrote:
"Skip M" wrote in message
news:FbY4d.34215$aW5.6014@fed1read07...


Depth of field and sharpness of image are both very good reasons to shoot
at
f11 and 1/25. Most lenses are not at their best wide open, f8 and f11
are
usually better choices, if you can do it. And, of course, depth of field
is
greater at f11 than it is at f2.8.


Increasing ISO will never increase overall optical quality, even if
the lens performs a little better stopped down.

More idiocy from a familiar source.


Haven't you all killfiled him yet? If you all didn't respond, I would have
less noise.

S.