ISO Sweet Spot

[Villalobos]

Listened to a podcast the other week (TWIP) and they were talking about that different cameras has different ISo sweet spots. I sort of automatically put my camera to the lowest ISO setting when I want the highest IQ, but according to this discussion the best IQ could as well be ISO 160 or ISO 200 and so on. Is this really true? Should I test my camera to try to find out the best ISO settings or ..?

Hakan

[ohenry]

I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze, personally.

[Villalobos]

Originally Posted by ohenry

I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze, personally.

Guess you are right. The difference between different ISO 100 and ISO 160 or what ever, is with modern cameras of today very little. Maybe this was more of an issue some years back?

[Jacco]

Originally Posted by Villalobos

Maybe this was more of an issue some years back?

Particular films had/have particular 'sweet ISO spots'. So maybe particular sensors have particular 'sweet ISO spots' too. But in daily practice it doesn't make a noticeable difference. So it's a moot point to 99.9% of photographers. Purely academic. Like ohenry suggested.

[R. House]

I think you should test out your camera with every concievable setting you might use. I find that with my Nikon D80 that when handholding I do better at ISO 200-800. The little bit of noise I might get is compensated by sharper photos.

[Mr. Pickles]

In theory, yes, every one has some "sweet spot" where the balance between sharp, in focus, noise, image quality, etc. is the best.

But like OHenry mentioned, it isn't worth the time or trouble for the most part. You could shoot the same scene, at the same aperture, with different ISO settings, but then what do you have? You got a DPR-like review of something. What happens when the lighting changes? What happens when the focal length changes? What happens when.............?

[jfrancho]

Close to perfect exposure of the subject is far more important than finding some so called sweet spot.

[Gary Mayo]

Some cameras do have a sweet spot ISO wise according to people that use them.

I own a Kodak Pro SLR/N and the sweet ISO is reported to be 160. My eye cannot see it, but the 'experts' swear there is something special in that ISO.

Personally I think in the day of the D3, the sweet spot for my SLR/N is at the bottom of a lake! lol

[Mr. Pickles]

Originally Posted by lincolninked

.....the sweet spot for my SLR/N is at the bottom of a lake!

What, all your doors stay open by themselves?

[afterburn]

double post

[afterburn]

Supposedly for Canon, the sweet spot is 160 too. From what I understand, the 160 value is created by downsampling 200, which reduces noise.

On the other hand, up or down sampled ISO values reduce dynamic range, so I guess you will have to pick which is more important. Personally, I will take DR over noise.

[jfrancho]

For best results, stick to the native increments - 100, 200, 400, etc. - and use good exposure to reduce noise with Canon.

[brice]

I think you time is better invested in finding the sweet spot for your lens aperture. I've found the difference between a spectacular shot and an OK shot is often aperture.

[Gary Mayo]

This is a little off topic, but this poster has hit the nail on the head!

Great Advice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pretty much every lens is not at its best full open. If you will stop down a couple of clicks, your images will improve!

Notice in Program, your camera seldom uses a lens full open.

Originally Posted by brice

I think you time is better invested in finding the sweet spot for your lens aperture. I've found the difference between a spectacular shot and an OK shot is often aperture.

[Gary Mayo]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pickles

What, all your doors stay open by themselves?

Very Funny!

I need to post that baby on eBay to find it a home while it still has some market value. Once Nikon releases a larger sensor, it will really be a door stop! lol

[generic]

But with 'liquid nails' it could be such a good(solid) doorstop !