ISO 1600

[cigrainger]

Hmmmm...

 

[LaFoto]

Victoria Crowned Pigeon. They are among the most beautiful, I think, if not being the most beautiful pigeon there is!
Where did you see it? In the zoo? The 1600 ISO hardly show. They're definitely not distracting or anything. If they were required to get this --- well! Then use them! If photos like this one are the result, then - why ever NOT?

 

[Slaphead]

As LaFoto said, if you need ISO 1600 to get the shot then use it. It certainly hasn't damaged this picture. I'll bet that if you print this out the noise will be to all intents and purposes invisible.

The only time I worry about noise is when I'm pixel peeping (or shooting at ISO 6400). The truth is that if you can fill the frame with your subject and expose correctly then the noise will have no real impact on the picture at ISO 1600 IME. It's only if you need to crop heavily and/or have underexposed the image that noise will become a problem.

 

[Al-Wazeer]

nice photo and totally has no damage from high iso

i never used more than 400 iso!

 

[mar1u5]

Maybe it's just that I'm too picky, but the ISO noise is visible all over that picture. The feathers, the bokeh, everything is affected. It's not a ruined shot by any means, but it's there. But the noise isn't the biggest problem: the lack of vibrance and color depth is the biggest concert, as everything looks flat.

You can clearly use iso 1600 for emergency situations, but I wouldn't recomend it for anything else.