Auto ISO - Yay or Nay

[unpopular]

I always shoot full manual. Not because I think I'm a badass, but because I like to have complete control to get the exposure I want, which is not often what the camera wants.

A, S, and P modes also give you complete control over exposure. You don't have any more control over exposure with manual mode than you have with A, S, or P modes.

This is true to some extent (well, not P). The problem is that it's much more intuitive to adjust exposure compensation than using the EC values. I can effectively switch between Av and Tv modes 'in my head' when shooting manual to get the best possible exposure for the situation considering how I want it to be conveyed.

I do think though that shooting in one of the computerized meter modes kind of defeats the point of manual exposure. I shoot exclusively in spot mode/manual so that I can adjust exposure according to intended placement, rather than what some engineer has determined is the best case for the situation regardless of subject matter.

I think a problem with a lot of this new technology isn't that any one part of it is bad. AE isn't bad. Evaluative metering isn't bad. But if you use these technologies in a way to avoid making a technical decision, you'll only end up limiting yourself.

Auto ISO, though, is bad, and is unneccesary. Just adjust ISO manually according to the situation. If you can't get teh dof you want or handhold when you want it, bump up the ISO. I don't know what possible situation auto ISO would be neccesary, unless you pay absolutely no attention to the camera.

 

[MReid]

QUOTE] I don't know what possible situation auto ISO would be neccesary, unless you pay absolutely no attention to the camera.[/QUOTE]

Winner.

The auto iso keeps you in the exposure pocket without having to make camera adjustments.
All I care about the exposure when I am shooting is that it is not blown out and that I am somewhere in the ballpark of a proper exposure.
I adjust just about every frame in post where I can take my time and get the light and shadow and exposure perfect.

 

[Austin Greene]

A, S, and P modes also give you complete control over exposure. You don't have any more control over exposure with manual mode than you have with A, S, or P modes.

This is true to some extent (well, not P).

No, it's complete...not to some extent. And it does include P mode.

The problem is that it's much more intuitive to adjust exposure compensation than using the EC values. I can effectively switch between Av and Tv modes 'in my head' when shooting manual to get the best possible exposure for the situation considering how I want it to be conveyed.

Well, I've never believed that controlling exposure was in any way intuitive, but to your point I would say that the "intuitiveness" of exposure settings depends on the approach and point of view of the person. My process is to first set exposure, and then I set aperture/shutter for the effect I want. So exposure is purely an exercise in EV, and the selection of shutter or aperture is purely an exercise in effect.

I'm sorry, but in my opinion (and take that for what its worth), that is a ridiculous way to shoot if you at all plan on becoming a better photographer. If anything should be intuitive in photography after some work its exposure. NOTHING matters more in a photo. You could have the most beautiful landscape in the world, but if you can't expose it properly or as you see fit, it isn't worth a dime.

A good measure of how creative a photographer is, or how well their creativity can be translated into a photo, can be how they expose a photo. In the case of people setting up in full auto, or passing much of the control over to the camera, that doesn't say much. Even the best camera's out there are not designed to do the creative design for you, they only stick with middle of the road, safe exposure values. Your job as the photographer is to infuse the photo with your vision of how you want it to be, and being unaware of proper exposure methods is key to having the most options in that department.

Cranking around the EC dial huge amounts to compensate for poor knowledge of how your camera works is a generally bad idea.
Understanding how to actually use your camera, and the roles of SS, aperture, and ISO in the exposure triangle in order to achieve the look you want is not.


EDIT:

This gives me tremendous freedom to experiment because it's so easy to change settings. I've been able to take 5 shots and 5 different apertures in about 7 seconds...and all had the same consistent exposure.

And just another note, I'm not saying full manual is better (I prefer it, but that doesnt make it so), but if you knew how to properly use manual mode you would have no problem with those same shots.

 

[mwinterlin]

It depends on the situation. Sunlight? Put ISO at 100-200 and keep it there. Then adjust the brightness using aperture and shutter speed. If you are shooting in changing conditions (Sun going down etc) put the iso at either a mid range or the highest you want to go then adjust the brightness with aperture and shutter speed

 

[MReid]

I think there is a disparity between people who cut their teeth on film and people who cut their teeth on nothing but digital.
The facts to me are:
Film photographers had to know how everthing worked and exposure was everything, a LOT of knowledge and experience went into making good photos.....and a lot of wrestling with the camera and tools to get there. With digital all this work and knowledge is not required the camera will do it for you.

Digital....seriously....very little knowledge is required. If you know what F-stops do and what ISO does and set you camera up right to start with....with the camera set up right to begin with, very little input is required to stay in the exposure pocket....it is like pushing the Easy button. All that is required are small adustments of the exposure compensation dial once in a while to get good enough exposures.
Good enough exposures is all you need with digital if you are then processing them.

I started out wrestling the camera years ago thinking I had to control everything...the more experience I gained the more streamlined my process became....now I let the camera do everything possible.....

 

[Austin Greene]

Well, in my opinion, letting the camera do the work while maintaining complete control is how you shoot when you ARE a better photographer. So I guess we just have a difference of opinion.

You see, but thats the funny part. By shooting in manual I maintain control of everything. No pawning poor photos off on the camera, its all me and I take full responsibility. I know my camera well enough that shooting manual is easy and seamless, and I'd have no problem keeping up with someone on an auto-mode, so how in the world does that make me a worse-off photographer? At the end of the day I like to look at my photos, not the camera's photos.

The shooting mode has absolutely nothing to do wth exposure, and if you think EC is to compensate for poor knowledge then I'd say you don't really understand how the auto systems in your camera work.

Do what you will, and shoot how you will, but don't misinform folks on the workings of camera systems. At the end of the day on your average DSLR hundreds of thousands are spent in R&D for better processing, high ISO noise reduction, faster shutter speeds, better battery life, better sensors, etc. However, at the end of the day, you'd be hard pressed to find any significant amount budgeted to significantly improve the functions of auto mode. In large part, when you buy that $3,000 DSLR your paying for the hardware, not the bottom-of-the-barrel auto programming that was done on the software.

Really, if you want to shoot in auto, get a point and shoot. At least in that case the R&D money goes towards what your using the camera for.

 

[shmne]

I have only ever had 1 film camera and it was essentially a "point and shoot" as I had no clue how to use it properly. I learned all of my professional photography skills on a digital camera.

That said, I've never touched any of the auto modes because I am an artist. My teacher trained me very well, however she always said if you are having issues to feel free to use the auto modes. For me, they did not hep me learn how exposure worked and if anything made it more of a confusing experience. I also paint, but I would never let my brush paint for me or let it choose my colors or choice of canvas. It would have terrible taste! Does that mean I don't digitally paint? Not at all! I have a Wacom tablet and would have to say 80% of my paintings are digital.

What I hate the most about the auto modes is that when you are in an auto mode they don't give you the mistakes that you fall in love with forever! Learning to see a great composition in an otherwise crap shot is probably one of the most rewarding parts of shooting manually. This is something too many people overlook since we are all obsessed with "getting the perfect shot."

Can more photographers get back into the art please? I'm sick of all of these craftsmen sitting around here talking about getting perfect shots everytime and missing the entire point of a camera. It is a device that captures a moment forever, and it sees differently then how we see. Use that to your advantage more often

 

[dumeril7]

*200, 400 ISO... pines nostalgically for Kodachrome 25 and Panatomic-X* I'm curious, OP, what sort of work are you doing where you are faced with such dynamic conditions and so little time to prepare for a shot?

Easy. My kids present wonderful, unexpected, and short-lived photo ops all !@#$ing the time. And because they are so inconsiderate, they don't let me know when they're about to be cute. And just as quickly as they present the photo opp -- while I'm taking the time to change my f/stop, shutter speed, and ISO settings from the last photo opp -- it evaporates. The moment is gone. Unfortunately my kids are unable to recreate these moments on command. Life is what happens when you're busy fiddling with your camera. ;-)

I use some auto settings when not doing so is going to cause me to lose shots. If I'm going for high art, or I have the luxury of prep time, I'll use full or partial manual control. I'll also go manual if an auto system is confused by the task I'm presenting to it. FWIW, I learned in the film era, in which people didn't worry much about ISO while shooting, only when they were loading a new roll.

d7

 

[JClishe]

That said, I've never touched any of the auto modes because I am an artist.

So are you implying that there's a connection between the mode a person shoots in, and whether he/she can be called an "artist"?

If you see a picture that you really like, do you need to find out what mode the photographer used before you'd label the photographer as an artist and whether or not the picture is truly "art". In other words, a great picture shot in manual is "art", but that same great picture shot in Av isn't?

If that's not what you're implying, than your statement above is misleading. If that is what you're implying, then, well, we have a different opinion on the matter. My opinion is that art is about the tangible result and isn't defined by what the dial on top of the camera said. I wouldn't say that an Ansel Adams isn't art because I felt he didn't shoot it right. That would be a preposterous statement but my interpretation of your comments leads me to believe that's the exact logic that you're implying.

 

[shmne]

an Ansel Adams isn't art because I felt he didn't shoot it right.

Are you implying Ansel Adams isn't art? Funny how when you cut out a sentence from a quote it changes drastically.

The vast majority of people using auto modes aren't shooting artistic shots and for a reason, the auto modes are not designed for artistic intent. Sure, go ahead and use auto modes to get a shot in pitch black. I'd love to see that. You can use anything for purposes they aren't intended for, but normally artists prefer to use manual mode because there is no limitation established on the camera. That is why I stated what I did, most photographers using the camera for artistic purposes can't use the auto modes even if they wanted to. I thought this was common knowledge though so I apologize for coming off as offensive as you did.

Next time please don't just quote one line, especially when it is in direct reference to the rest of the quote. I went on to speak about how my teacher encouraged us to use the auto modes to help learn but that I felt they hindered me. In fact I continue to say a lot of pertinent information that you clearly chose to ignore ^_^. I even stated at the end that the process is less relevant and it is an issue that everyone is hung up on getting the perfect shot.

 

[JClishe]

Are you implying Ansel Adams isn't art? Funny how when you cut out a sentence from a quote it changes drastically.

Yes, when you EDIT a sentence like you did, it does change it drastically. You EDITED my sentence by deliberately omitting portions of it with the specific intent of altering its original meaning. You can't in good faith compare that to what I did. I quoted your entire sentence, word for word, with the specific intent of summarizing what I honestly felt was an accurate portrayal of the message you were intending to convey. If my interpretation was incorrect than feel free to correct me. In fact I even came right out and asked you if my interpretation was correct.

So don't try to pretend that my quote and your quote had the same intent, you'll only make yourself look foolish.

 

[MTVision]

And when I shoot with auto modes I also maintain control of everything. The only reason you think I'm not in control is because you don't understand how to use the auto mode controls of your camera.

Not anywhere near as seamless or as quick as you could be if you used auto modes.

It's very easy to find a gallery full of incredible images that were taken in manual mode. It's too bad, though, that's there's no such gallery of the shots missed from fiddling with the dials or of the bad exposures when a dial was turned in the wrong direction in haste.

Shooting in manual certainly does not make you a worse photographer. But it does make you a slower photographer because you must always manipulate two dials to capture different effects of shutter/aperture at the same exposure, whereas I only have to manipulate one. That's an obvious and unchallengeable fact.

Once again you're proving how little you know of the camera's operation beyond manual mode. I remember having such a conversion with manual mode shooter who used a Nikon. The Exposure Compensation button is right next to the shutter button. The person admitted that he didn't know what that button was for or how to use it. Yet, he was adamant that one has more control over the camera in manual mode. He's wrong, as are you. That's what happens when you make your determinations with only partial knowledge of how the camera works.

And I say the same to you.

And you know this because you work for Nikon or Canon? How much do you think Nikon's CLS cost to develop? How about TTL-BL, which utilizes distance and color to determine flash power? And what of the new 3D Color Matrix Meter III system with a 91K sensor with advanced scene recognition and face recognition in the Nikon's flagship D4?

The more you speak the more you reveal how little you actually know about advanced cameras and their operation.

I learned photography on an all-manual Canon F-1, producing B&W prints in my bathroom/darkroom. I am no stranger to doing EVERYTHING by hand. But being a computer programmer by trade, I'm able to understand and appreciate the benefits of the auto modes. Auto modes allow me to control my exposure precisely under any conditions, while freeing me to concentrate on my subject. I recommend taking some time to learn how auto modes work.

This is the stupidest argument ever. Who cares if you shoot in manual, aperture priority, shutter priority, or program as long as you get the shot you want. Some people favor manual and others favor the semi-auto modes - doesn't make either party wrong. Just like some favor Nikon and some favor Canon.

I shoot in manual because that's what I learned and I honestly don't really know how to shoot in the other modes as well because I haven't used them. But, I don't think manual is the end all be all just like I don't feel that way about the semi-auto modes. Whatever works for you is what you should use.

 

[shmne]

Yes please continue walking around my direct statements It really proves your points very well. I didn't edit anything by the way, I just started the quote where I felt the poignant statement was coming from like you did. To be fair I did forget to include an ellipses. My 9th grade English teacher would be quite upset with me.

So please continue telling me how I'm an elitest jerk! I love when trolls can't keep on topic to what is pertinent. I made several extremely valid points and you just jumped off ship and freaked out about a single sentence that was taken completely out of context.

In fact I have always presented extremely valid information to this topic several times and the auto-jockies always get up in arms about it. I'm sure the manual-meatheads would attack me as well, however since I am a mostly manual shooter they see me as one of their own. Very rarely however have I ever been confronted with how I am wrong, because I've actually pretty much summed up the advantages manual has over auto-modes and auto has over manual. With that said auto modes have a lot of use, I just am not part of that section of photography that uses them most often.

Outdoors shooting events? Av (consistent depth of field is something I prefer over stopping action, I know a lot of people like to use Tv.) Family and friends around? Honestly I'll probably just throw it in P. Have to get a head shot for the paper? Av. Want to experiment with crazy set ups that the camera can't focus on, let alone expose for? Manual.

I also light 100% manually, but that is because I don't want to spend the money for an expensive flash I'd never use. The vast majority of my commercial work is done with manual strobes, no TTL, because the last thing I want is any potential inconsistency. It isn't like I'm shooting for high end companies, but it is still important to me to get the image as consistent as possible. In fact almost all of my photography is done in a studio with no need at all for anything but manual firing and lighting.

Isn't that funny? I prefer manual because the field of photography I work in basically needs it. Isn't it also funny that when people prefer auto over manual is usually because they are in a field that benefits more from automatic settings? Wow! How crazy is that logic?

This will always end up in the same result, both sides being almost completely blind to the other and only because they are too ignorant to be able to understand why the other side prefers the alternative.

 

[MTVision]

This will always end up in the same result, both sides being almost completely blind to the other and only because they are too ignorant to be able to understand why the other side prefers the alternative.

^^^^^ Exactly.

 

[pisicel]

I use AUTO ISO since I bought a Nikon 70-300. I really need at least 1/300s speed, so on my D5100 I set auto iso max 3600 and minimum speed to 1/300s.
This allows the camera to manage acceptable speed even in the cloudiest days.