Why use High ISO and High Shutter speed at same time?

[vadim2200]

I was reviewing photos from my wedding long time ago that was taken by very expensive photographer. After reviewing images that were taken indoor during summer with lots of ambient light I noticed that he was using
Shutter Speed 1600 F2.8 ISO 1600 with 85mm 1.2
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B41XMEyWgOBhSkdILTFPQjMxOVU
taken with Canon 5d Mark 2

So why would he use this high ISO, why not just to lower SS, or is it because it gives images slight grainy effect?

 

[480sparky]

High ISO isn't the 'bad thing' it used to be. Digital cameras are better these days with higher ISOs, and software that deal with it is improving as well.

I'd rather have noise ('grainy effect') than a blurry photo if I were shooting a wedding.

 

[vadim2200]

Well I understand that, but why use such a high shutter? You can lower it to compensate to low iso

 

[480sparky]

Shooting a wedding isn't like a studio shoot. Often, you have very limited time to set a shot up. Besides, if you get the shot desired with a high ISO & shutter speed, what's to be gained by lowering them?

 

[vadim2200]

Less noise. Of course it depends what size prints will be printed

 

[480sparky]

And like I said, cameras are getting better with having less noise at higher ISOs, there's better software today that can deal with it.

So unless you're going to blow the shots up to plaster on a billboard, then stand 3 feet away and expect to see the hair on a flea's leg.............

 

[zombiesniper]

I can't speak to why the photographer shot that way since I wasn't there but I can come up with a couple scenario's and I'm sure there are more I'm not thinking of.

1. Was just shooting or expecting a bit of action and noticed the bride sitting at a great angle and took the shot, therefore was set up for a bit more action than this photo.

2. The photographer had 2 camera's with different lenses. Was using camera A, but for this shot switched to camera B and quickly adjusted to get the shot.


I can't think of any reason to wan't to push the ISO (I know it's not a bad thing....... unless you're doing it for no benefit) in this shot and agree I would want to shoot a much slower shutter speed but again I wasn't there.

 

[DarkShadow]

Maybe he thought the bride was going to fly away, she might be a witch.

 

[Derrel]

With the 5D mark II, ISO 1600 is the top practical ISO for many people: the images look good at 1600, especially on close-ups of one or two or three people. Yes, the DR is wider at base ISO, and the color is a bit richer too, but as long as there is not a lot of underexposure, 1600 on the 5D-II will look quite acceptable. And yes a slight bit of digital noise will look acceptable to many people, especially in smaller images. Second: he might have been "foofing", something a very famous Canon wedding shooter advocated: using the 5D-II, the famous fellow would do what he called "foofing", or using on-camera Canon speedlight, bounced up and off of surfaces, often DISTANT walls or ceilings, at ISO's of up to 6,400, and often with the lens at f/2.8. This flash is weak on the longest of throws, but it FILLS IN shadows, and that kills noise. It only takes a tiny bit of flash fill to eliminate noise where it shows up the most: in under-exposed areas.

With a High Speed Sync capable flash, the photgrapher can control backgrounds by throwing them out of focus, AND shoot at fast shutter speeds, due to the elevated ISO level, AND can use wide lens openings like f/2. f/2.8, f/3.2 and so on. This can create a beautiful, beautiful look: heavy background defocus, shallow DOF, and very subtle flash fill for sparkle, and nice light that is not overly contrasty, and the flash kills noise in the shadows. This creates a VERY easy-to-adjust raw file from a great FF pro cam like a 5D-II.

The famous wedding shooter who coined the term "foofing" was Denis Reggie, prhaps one of the most-famous wedding shooters of the last 30 years. Perhaps the wedding shooter who shot your wedding set up his camera or cameras to be at 1600 ISO, for the "worst-of" conditions at the wedding venue. Maybe he planned the enire shoot around the 35/1.4-L and the 50/1.2-L, and planned to utilize the sheer speed of such lenses. Maybe he wanted everything to be at ISO 1,600, so he would neer have to make an ISO adjustment during the event.

 

[unpopular]

No. I agree. Unless there was some reason for it like what darrel mentioned about high speed ttl, it was sloppy. A lower ISO and longer shutter speed would have been better no matter what the camera is.

That said, I also agree that a wedding isn't like a studio shot and so the sloppiness might be understandable.

But yes. No matter what the camera was the better choice would have been a longer shutter. What was practical given the circumstance is another story.

Regardless, however, there is no excuse for bad photography.

 

[Derrel]

I am not intimately familiar with Canon's AUTO ISO function, but I know it is different than Nikon or Pentax have. is it possible that the exposure triangle settings were the result of some type of AUTO ISO settings? Like maybe he pre-entered f/2.8 as the f/ value and 1/1600 as the speed Maximum, and in that light, the camera set the ISO value to 1600? Can the 5D-II shoot Av mode AUTO ISO? Or Tv mode AUTO ISO?

On a new-era Nikon, one could set Manual mode, and dial in f/2.8 at 1/1600, and the camera would drop or lower the ISO to make the f/stop and the speed yield the right exposure, by adjusting the ISO level.

If you have an original fille, I would dig through the EXIF information, and look for the exposure **mode** the camera was set to, more so than just the settings of the triangle. Knowing the exposure mode the camera was in might give a better idea of the photographer's original intent.

 

[Drive-By-Shooter]

let's vote. vadim should call and get the scoop.
i say "he wanted everything to be at ISO 1,600, so he would never have to make an ISO adjustment during the event."

don't disparage him, tho. how many times have you forgotten to reset something that ruined a shot? better a bit of grain than a mistake. also, it takes a while to accept that today's 1600 is less grainy than the best 400 films.

the picture you shared is very nice. [pretty wife,too!]
the ultra high speed flash sync method that Derrel explained is exciting, but can't be discerned here. it would be nice to see more pics if it was used.

 

[zombiesniper]

I am not intimately familiar with Canon's AUTO ISO function, but I know it is different than Nikon or Pentax have. is it possible that the exposure triangle settings were the result of some type of AUTO ISO settings?

Absolutely could be. Don't know how Canon is different though, You choose auto ISO and the camera chooses the best ISO for the correct exposure. How does Nikon and Pentax do it?

 

[astroNikon]

Last month when I shot an event in a bad lighting building. I set Shutter, Aperture for what I want, Selected a fixed max ISO (not auto iso), and with a bracketed flash let the camera add fill light to balance the exposure without blasting the people there. I can't recall if the pics I did when I did that were selected but I figured I would test it .. always a learning experience.

 

[robbins.photo]

I was reviewing photos from my wedding long time ago that was taken by very expensive photographer. After reviewing images that were taken indoor during summer with lots of ambient light I noticed that he was using
Shutter Speed 1600 F2.8 ISO 1600 with 85mm 1.2
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B41XMEyWgOBhSkdILTFPQjMxOVU
taken with Canon 5d Mark 2

So why would he use this high ISO, why not just to lower SS, or is it because it gives images slight grainy effect?

Well the high shutter speed would ensure very crisp, sharp photos regardless of motion. Depending on the camera body used ISO 1600 wouldn't necessarily introduce a ton of noise and could easily be dealt with in post process.