Puzzling EXIF data question for NIkon D3S camera

[fmeeran]

i can accept your writings... well said and easy to understand...
most importantly.. it is kind easy to digest and polite...
your previous post to me was really i think not correct... but its over... as you can see the moderator catchlights remove them...
but i also would like to inform to TS as per my thinking..
bcos i personally i think even setting higher iso, the result of what TS see...
and what the TS might get will be different... we cannot dont ignore this possibilites...
just by boosting the iso to higher, the result could be grainy face and well expose background due to the metering by the camera...
one reason could be the lens focal length use or the position of the person away from the camera...
example if metering based on af point is used, and the af point covered the whole face of the subject...
this could result in grainy face... right... my experience told me so...
then we need to switch to matrix metering or spot with a slight bigger diameter (D7000 can set this)...
then with or without higher iso, the result will or should be better...
that i why i requested the TS to shot more... till date, i think i never even explore more than 10% of my D7000 settable settings...
and still picking up bites and pieces here and there every weekend...
that is why i come in here to read... as well as practice in the weekend...
cheers...
am i also think the forum could be a better place if words typed are less harsh...
as words are harder to digest than spoken...
peace...

Dude, you need to work on punctuations. Your post is a headache to read and I stopped trying to understand it after the first two lines.

 

[twisted illusion]

it will be tough to improve for an old man like me who didnt go to much school when young...
but i will surely try...
could you tell me how i can rephrase...

Dude, you need to work on punctuations. Your post is a headache to read and I stopped trying to understand it after the first two lines.

 

[magicianhisoka]

One thing I have learnt from this thread though - it might be wise to wipe my EXIF info before handing it to the consumer.

well said. i wouldn't want my techniques to be dissected on the internet

 

[Reno]

If I were forced to take a standpoint I wouldn't consider anything "wrong".
I also shoot at ISO 3200 quite regularly, sometimes even higher so I don't see anything weird with it.

If I were to find anything "wrong" though, it would be the need for a shutter speed of 1/2500s. For a wedding, I find it rather absurd. Whatever the photographer was trying do, I cannot figure out. But I don't wish to judge either, perhaps he has something else up his sleeve?

One thing I have learnt from this thread though - it might be wise to wipe my EXIF info before handing it to the consumer.

I do not find the photographer shooting style absurd in anyway. Maybe that guy wanted to shoot the guest throwing petals at the couple during the march-in procedure or it happens that the photographer was shooting something when the lighting is dark and happen the lighting suddenly brightens up and hence the fast shutter speed of 1/2500s.

 

[Nostalgraphy]

All the "big boys" who are sharing their experience and knowledge, thank you for it because the sharing is really very enriching for someone like me.

In D7K, the ISO is set to auto unless you have manually change it and I am a scrooge when it comes to ISO going above 800 unless there is a need to do so. I hope I am not side tracking but one struggle I had quite recently is to shoot the footballers in the Lion City Cup with my 28-300. With the lens fully extended, the aperture max at 5.6. I assume all the lights are bright enough in the stadium so I have set ISO to 400. Spot metering. EV +1. VR on and camera mounted on a tripod. Shuttle at 1/60. I failed miserably. I would like to see the fooballers freeze in motion. I am definitely going to try on my own but based on what you have shared, if I were to bump the ISO to say 1600-6400, would I have done better? Thanks for any sharing again! Please don't ask me to invest in 400mm f/2.8 cos I dun have $$$$ LOL...

 

[Nostalgraphy]

well said. i wouldn't want my techniques to be dissected on the internet

haha I second that!!!

 

[chanjyj]

well said. i wouldn't want my techniques to be dissected on the internet

I don't mind my techniques discussed. Nor do I mind people asking what equipment I use etc.
Ultimately how I make the shot cannot be duplicated in its entirety by using the same equipment etc.. and they certainly can't predict my NEXT shot. You get the gist.

What unnerves me is the thought that someone is going through my EXIF and saying "hmm, ISO 3200.. strange. Is that a lousy photographer?" :bigeyes:
I don't mind if you call me a crap photographer. I have plenty of clients and I'm not grovelling for business. And I also accept the opinion you have, that maybe, my photos are not to your taste. But to do it based on a number scares the living daylights out of me.

I hope I am not causing any offence to the threadstarter by my above statement.

 

[chanjyj]

I do not find the photographer shooting style absurd in anyway. Maybe that guy wanted to shoot the guest throwing petals at the couple during the march-in procedure or it happens that the photographer was shooting something when the lighting is dark and happen the lighting suddenly brightens up and hence the fast shutter speed of 1/2500s.

Your 2nd scenario is a possibility. But I find Nikon tends to increase aperture more quickly than the shutter speed. No hard facts, just an observation I've gotten after using my cameras for so long.

As for 1st scenario... I will admit my word "absurd" is rather inappropriate. But even to freeze the petals I don't think you would need 1/2500s! Can't imagine any aperture or ISO combination that would work with that shutter speed unless you are in bright daylight (well, maybe he was..)

 

[chanjyj]

All the "big boys" who are sharing their experience and knowledge, thank you for it because the sharing is really very enriching for someone like me.

In D7K, the ISO is set to auto unless you have manually change it and I am a scrooge when it comes to ISO going above 800 unless there is a need to do so. I hope I am not side tracking but one struggle I had quite recently is to shoot the footballers in the Lion City Cup with my 28-300. With the lens fully extended, the aperture max at 5.6. I assume all the lights are bright enough in the stadium so I have set ISO to 400. Spot metering. EV +1. VR on and camera mounted on a tripod. Shuttle at 1/60. I failed miserably. I would like to see the fooballers freeze in motion. I am definitely going to try on my own but based on what you have shared, if I were to bump the ISO to say 1600-6400, would I have done better? Thanks for any sharing again! Please don't ask me to invest in 400mm f/2.8 cos I dun have $$$$ LOL...

1. It's shutter, not shuttle.

2. You can't do anything except bump ISO up. Your lens simply cannot cope.

3. Footballers in action? Be prepared to shoot at 1/125s minimum.

4. Stadium lights look bright, but that is because your eye is adapting to the light. Your camera can't do that. Think of your eye having great auto-ISO, dynamic range and micro-contrast.

 

[Nostalgraphy]

1. It's shutter, not shuttle.

2. You can't do anything except bump iso up. Your lens simply cannot cope.

3. Footballers in action? Be prepared to shoot at 1/125s minimum.

4. Stadium lights look bright, but that is because your eye is adapting to the light. Your camera can't do that. Think of your eye having great auto-iso, dynamic range and micro-contrast.

thank you sir!

 

[ghoonk]

Coming in a bit late here, but I usually shoot jazz concerts here in the UAE (Dubai). I shoot semi-professionally using a D3s and a D700, and due to the venue lighting that is constantly shifting where exposure and colors are concerned, I usually set Auto-ISO to max out at 6400 on my D700 and 8000 on my D3s. When shooting performances in pubs, I go as high as ISO12800 where the venue is so dark that shooting with an iPhone yields a largely black image.

One of the benefits of shooting with the D3s and the D700 is the high ISO performance. Many people think that ISO6400 is just that, but just because a camera can shoot at 6400 does not mean that the images will come out the same. Even at ISO6400, the D3s images come out cleaner than those from my D700. There is also a reason that some people refer to the D3s as the Lord of Darkness.

in the case of wedding photography, I'm assuming that the images were shot at the wedding dinner/reception, in indoor lighting. Experienced photographers know that in such situations, ISO800 is a best case scenario when shooting without the aid of a flash (I personally prefer not to shoot events with flash as it creates a distraction, ruins other people's shots, and the end result is more often than not, looking like something out of the pages of cheap magazines), where ISO1600 and above is common.

As a fellow forumer mentioned, the variance in ISO probably comes from the use of Auto-ISO, and while I cannot speak for the photographer, the reason I shoot with Auto-ISO under such conditions is so that I have one less variable to consider (read up on the exposure triangle here - ISO, shutter speed and aperture). When shooting events, I'm more concerned with getting an appropriate shutter speed to capture the moment (higher shutter speeds to capture running children), or an appropriate aperture to create the sort of bokeh or allow me to shoot at an acceptable shutter speed when ISO is 'maxed' (i.e. reached the maximum value I allow it to reach in Auto-ISO). This was, I have some degree of control over the mood or look I am trying to capture.

Going with Auto-ISO also means that in some cases, the camera would choose the lowest ISO possible based on my manual settings for shutter speed and aperture. I use this technique often when shooting motorsport events at night (e.g. 24 hours of Dubai endurance race) - as the cars pass by, depending on the light available, and with my aperture at f2.8 and shutter speed at 1/60 - 1/80, if the car is under the floodlight, the camera may choose ISO1000 instead of ISO6400 when the car is in between floodlights.

Hope this makes sense.

 

[brapodam]

example if metering based on af point is used, and the af point covered the whole face of the subject...
this could result in grainy face... right... my experience told me so...

Metering mode does not affect noise generated, I believe. However, if the camera underexposes the photo, there will be more visible noise as noise is more visible in shadow areas. This could be why certain metering modes give you a result of grainy face, as those metering modes may end up underexposing the photo. However, this does not mean that the metering mode actually affects the amount of noise generated.

 

[nightwolf75]

since TS has not followed up with the thread, thread closed.