Automatic ISO

[itznfb]

This is the last I'll say on this as I need to get some sleep and I won't care enough to revisit tomorrow... posts 29 and 30 he makes ridiculous statements basically saying he's smarter than a computer and tries to talk down to me and make me seem like I'm less of a photographer because I use an Auto setting. He only makes these statements because he actually has no clue how Auto-ISO works or what it is intended for.... yet he rambles on like a drunken retarded child because he has some inability to acknowledge he has no clue what he's talking about and in over his head. So he falls down the downward spiral and resorts to name calling and his normal childish behavior. Which, I'll admit.. I follow him on the way down because I just find it way too entertaining to avoid.

 

[Moglex]

If you want to use M 80%+ of the time just because you think it impresses a bunch of people on a forum then more power to you. Your results will never be as good as they could be.

See, that point can be used as an argument for either side. To me, "Auto" is not using the technology to it's fullest, nor to your advantage. Yes, you are relying on the technology more, but you are not using it more.

I think the last sentance is just completely ignorant. You honestly think Auto produces better results than Manual? 80%+ of the time?

You are misinterpreting what itznfb said.

There are other modes between full manual and full auto.

 

[Moglex]

I like to carve out pictures on the walls of caves. I don't trust glass that someone else made!

Ok, this thread just dropped from useful to childish. :lmao:

Only if you have had a sense of humour bypass. And lyao at childish jokes.

My response is... are you the guy that buys a D3 or 5D and takes all the shots with the camera on P-mode? And if not... why not? Seems the camera can do it all for you, right?

That response is nothing short of asinine.

Why would the fact that someone makes intelligent use of certain automatic features imply that they are going to use 'p' mode?

It doesn't unless you are completely clueless about modern camera technology.

 

[Moglex]

My car does 265kph, 12.8 in the 1/4 mile and does better mileage than a Toyota Corolla on the highway at 37mpg.

I bet you spent a lot of your time in pissing contests when you were at school, eh, Jerry?

I don't know why people think it's so hard to out think their cameras... all it takes is practice!

Another comment that indicates that you really haven't got a clue about how to make the best use of the tools available to you.

 

[Moglex]

if you see some of his posts and the ridiculous way he talks down to people...

Care to provide some examples?

look at his first post in this thread you understand that he's not just making a statement he's implying that the OP is inferior and that he is too good for these noob settings.

Here's his first post:

Nikon D200 and up all have it, but I never use it... I prefer to have total control over my camera, rather than let the camera decide what ISO is good for me.

How you infer the above from his first post, I haven't a clue.

Quite how you fail to make the same inference is a bit of a mystery.
Jerry is someone who has some serious personality issues that cause him to make more or less overt boasts on a very frequent basis. How the hell anyonyone can think it's normal behaviour to start trying to impress people with his car in the middle of a photograpy thread is beyond me.

Presumably he thinks this will impress people:

But since I own vehicles of my own, I have not sat in the back seat of anyone's car since 1976 (and that was my last time in a vehicle with me not driving... my last day in highschool when the bus driver drove me to my bus stop).

Copy #2 - I have a 48TB SAN in the basement

Something that I do in all weddings is I can follow a bride from the inside to the outside of the church where I use custom gelled lights inside to ambient outside lighting, as she walks down the isle after the wedding... and literally... I am changing WB settings, ISO settings, exposure compensation settings shutter settings and changing channels on the pocket wizard... *all* without taking my eye off the eyepiece and also snapping shots and I get 95% of my shots nailed down as I am walking backwards!

My car does 265kph, 12.8 in the 1/4 mile and does better mileage than a Toyota Corolla on the highway at 37mpg. (Note the odd (for an American) use of kph for the max speed to make the number look bigger )

I dare say some people find this sort of BS (BS irrespective of the truth of the statements) impressive, I and I know many others just find it rather sad and wearisome.

Can you imagine Ansel Adams wittering on about how big a camera he used?

Or Cartier Bresson boasting that any decent protographer only needed one lens?

 

[JamesMason]

Can you imagine Ansel Adams wittering on about how big a camera he used?

Or Cartier Bresson boasting that any decent protographer only needed one lens?

well said.

I know i say nikon is better than canon for a joke sometimes (ok most times) but does it really matter about what gear you use.

 

[musicaleCA]

Sheesh, why didn't I start reading this thread sooner?

 

[manaheim]

Quite how you fail to make the same inference is a bit of a mystery.
Jerry is someone who has some serious personality issues that cause him to make more or less overt boasts on a very frequent basis. How the hell anyonyone can think it's normal behaviour to start trying to impress people with his car in the middle of a photograpy thread is beyond me.

Well, this confirms it for me... you guys are inferring things.

And you're taking his "boasts" as personal insults.

I, too, think I am smarter than my camera and am far better prepared to select ISO than it is. Does that make me stupid, or worthy of your derision? Does that mean that I have attacked you, personally? Is MY statement of MY feelings about MY capabilities in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM a statement or reflection on yours?

I would like an answer to this question, because the way I see it...

Well, here...

Here are posts #29 and #30 that ifnzb (sp?) referenced.

Just to clarify. When you set Auto-ISO in camera you don't exit the menu until you've set the Hi/Low range. So it would only have set the ISO to 6400 if you set the Hi to 6400 or higher. If you set Hi to 3200 then you would have ended up with the same shot you set manually.

Yes. And if I needed ISO 6400 with an auto ISO level set to max out at ISO3200, I'd yet again have missed a shot thanks to an unacceptably long shutter speed.

Being in control means never having to blame your camera for missing the shot... it's your fault and I can live with that, since I have the control... and not the camera.

I don't see any offense to anyone here. Not even REMOTELY. Jerry says he doesn't want to have to worry about blaming the camera or himself... he knows if he messes up it's his fault, and he PERSONALLY feels more comfortable making the decision himself. HE PERSONALLY wants to remain in control.

I see ZERO comment on anyone else, and what's more is even if you interpret this ASSUMING he's out to get you, it's a stretch.

Ok, maybe the next one then...

Just to clarify. When you set Auto-ISO in camera you don't exit the menu until you've set the Hi/Low range. So it would only have set the ISO to 6400 if you set the Hi to 6400 or higher. If you set Hi to 3200 then you would have ended up with the same shot you set manually.

Yes. And if I needed ISO 6400 with an auto ISO level set to max out at ISO3200, I'd yet again have missed a shot thanks to an unacceptably long shutter speed.

Being in control means never having to blame your camera for missing the shot... it's your fault and I can live with that, since I have the control... and not the camera.

I know my capabilities... the camera doesn't... however I know that camera's capabilties and can push them a lot further than the conservative and "safe" settings that the good people at Nikon thought other photographers "should" shoot at.

Here he says HE knows HIS capabilities better than the camera. He says HE can push the camera better than what HE declares are "safe" settings.

I suppose you could have misinterpreted the "your" fault to be pointing at you, but it seemed clear to me he was speaking in the third person about himself since he immediately reverts back to "I" in the remaining pronouns. Even if this was pointed DIRECTLY at you and you interpreted it as an offense, it was a light one at best, and that's assuming that you're working pretty hard to read into this, since he seems pretty clearly to again be talking about HIMSELF.

This is the last I'll say on this as I need to get some sleep and I won't care enough to revisit tomorrow... posts 29 and 30 he makes ridiculous statements basically saying he's smarter than a computer and tries to talk down to me and make me seem like I'm less of a photographer because I use an Auto setting. He only makes these statements because he actually has no clue how Auto-ISO works or what it is intended for.... yet he rambles on like a drunken retarded child because he has some inability to acknowledge he has no clue what he's talking about and in over his head. So he falls down the downward spiral and resorts to name calling and his normal childish behavior. Which, I'll admit.. I follow him on the way down because I just find it way too entertaining to avoid.

"drunken retarded child"

Nice.

It's abundantly clear to me that the set of people who have been acting poorly on this is not a set that includes Jerry.

This kind of behavior on this forum really sucks. It's very much why some members have left, and it's very much the kind of thing that will continue to drive folks away. This is why I'm so ticked off about this particular thread, and why I'm speaking up on it. Those of you who have behaved thusly have behaved atroiciously... you have definitely earned a place on my list of people who I consider to be detractors in this community.

Not Jerry.

You.

 

[Moglex]

Quite how you fail to make the same inference is a bit of a mystery.
Jerry is someone who has some serious personality issues that cause him to make more or less overt boasts on a very frequent basis. How the hell anyonyone can think it's normal behaviour to start trying to impress people with his car in the middle of a photograpy thread is beyond me.

Well, this confirms it for me... you guys are inferring things.

And you're taking his "boasts" as personal insults.

I, too, think I am smarter than my camera and am far better prepared to select ISO than it is. Does that make me stupid, or worthy of your derision? Does that mean that I have attacked you, personally? Is MY statement of MY feelings about MY capabilities in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM a statement or reflection on yours?

I would like an answer to this question, because the way I see it...

Well, here...

Here are posts #29 and #30 that ifnzb (sp?) referenced.

Yes. And if I needed ISO 6400 with an auto ISO level set to max out at ISO3200, I'd yet again have missed a shot thanks to an unacceptably long shutter speed.

Being in control means never having to blame your camera for missing the shot... it's your fault and I can live with that, since I have the control... and not the camera.

I don't see any offense to anyone here. Not even REMOTELY. Jerry says he doesn't want to have to worry about blaming the camera or himself... he knows if he messes up it's his fault, and he PERSONALLY feels more comfortable making the decision himself. HE PERSONALLY wants to remain in control.

I see ZERO comment on anyone else, and what's more is even if you interpret this ASSUMING he's out to get you, it's a stretch.

Ok, maybe the next one then...

Yes. And if I needed ISO 6400 with an auto ISO level set to max out at ISO3200, I'd yet again have missed a shot thanks to an unacceptably long shutter speed.

Being in control means never having to blame your camera for missing the shot... it's your fault and I can live with that, since I have the control... and not the camera.

I know my capabilities... the camera doesn't... however I know that camera's capabilties and can push them a lot further than the conservative and "safe" settings that the good people at Nikon thought other photographers "should" shoot at.

Here he says HE knows HIS capabilities better than the camera. He says HE can push the camera better than what HE declares are "safe" settings.

I suppose you could have misinterpreted the "your" fault to be pointing at you, but it seemed clear to me he was speaking in the third person about himself since he immediately reverts back to "I" in the remaining pronouns. Even if this was pointed DIRECTLY at you and you interpreted it as an offense, it was a light one at best, and that's assuming that you're working pretty hard to read into this, since he seems pretty clearly to again be talking about HIMSELF.

This is the last I'll say on this as I need to get some sleep and I won't care enough to revisit tomorrow... posts 29 and 30 he makes ridiculous statements basically saying he's smarter than a computer and tries to talk down to me and make me seem like I'm less of a photographer because I use an Auto setting. He only makes these statements because he actually has no clue how Auto-ISO works or what it is intended for.... yet he rambles on like a drunken retarded child because he has some inability to acknowledge he has no clue what he's talking about and in over his head. So he falls down the downward spiral and resorts to name calling and his normal childish behavior. Which, I'll admit.. I follow him on the way down because I just find it way too entertaining to avoid.

"drunken retarded child"

Nice.

It's abundantly clear to me that the set of people who have been acting poorly on this is not a set that includes Jerry.

This kind of behavior on this forum really sucks. It's very much why some members have left, and it's very much the kind of thing that will continue to drive folks away. This is why I'm so ticked off about this particular thread, and why I'm speaking up on it. Those of you who have behaved thusly have behaved atroiciously... you have definitely earned a place on my list of people who I consider to be detractors in this community.

Not Jerry.

You.

Wow!

Certainly touched a bit of a nerve there, didn't we?

 

[Moglex]

I, too, think I am smarter than my camera and am far better prepared to select ISO than it is. Does that make me stupid, or worthy of your derision?

No, but it does show that you haven't thought through the occasions when auto-ISO might be useful.

As with Jerry it just shows that you have not worked out how to use all the facilities of your camera to the utmost in all circumstances.

Does that mean that I have attacked you, personally? Is MY statement of MY feelings about MY capabilities in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM a statement or reflection on yours?

I would like an answer to this question, because the way I see it...

No, it doesn't.

But when I read your posts I never get the idea that you are trying to overcome your own insecurity issues by unnecessary boasting or implicit put-downs.

It's abundantly clear to me that the set of people who have been acting poorly on this is not a set that includes Jerry.

If you really think that (for example) trying to start a pissing contest about how fast your car goes is good behaviour on a photographic forum then I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to differ.

And if you think that you can castigate someone for saying "drunken retarded child" but not mention Jerry's "My word is my bond, and worth a lot more than you ever will be" then one can only assume you are taking a bizarrely partisan approach for some reason.

 

[fiveoboy01]

No, but it does show that you haven't thought through the occasions when auto-ISO might be useful.

And you know this HOW? Can you read Chris' mind? Apparently so, since you all seem to be able to read Jerry's mind as well.

Maybe Chris KNOWS that Auto ISO could be useful in some situations and STILL chooses not to use it? Is that a REMOTE possiblity, or are you going to stick with the "Chris is too stubborn to try new stuff" theory?

Not Jerry.

You.

Agreed.

Some of you have some serious issues. You look like politicians on a witch hunt.

If you don't like Jerry's posts, quit whining about them, and use the ignore button. End of story.

 

[Moglex]

No, but it does show that you haven't thought through the occasions when auto-ISO might be useful.

And you know this HOW? Can you read Chris' mind?

No, I just read what he said.

If you don't like Jerry's posts, quit whining about them, and use the ignore button. End of story.

So if we don't like Jerry's posts we have to 'quit whining about them' but if you don't like people's posts you feel quite entitled to throw you weight around and tell them not to post.

Do you understand the meaning of hypocrisy?

 

[JamesMason]

6 pages of arguement over and auto iso setting. Wow

 

[PhotoXopher]

Has the answer to the posters question even been answered?

 

[Plato]

Has the answer to the posters question even been answered?

What question?