AutoISO messed up.... AGAIN? arrrrrrr it's just not that difficult

[criza]

The trouble with Auto ISO in Av mode now is that the camera chooses changing ISO before changing shutter speed and I hate that. Shutter speed doesn't affect image quality much after it reaches a minimum threshold for getting the shot, but ISO does.

If I could tell the camera to ONLY change ISO to keep the shutter speed from dipping below, say 1/1000, otherwise change shutter speed, that would solve my problem of constantly having to make small adjustments. As it stands now, I'm constantly making adjustments to minimize ISO and still get the shot.

That would be very powerful and be extremely helpful to sports togs who deal with rapidly changing lighting conditions.

That is the only thing that I am missing as well, on my Canon 60D! (besides microfocus adjustment) 8)


AND, I am guessing LetTheRightLensIn would be satisfied as well with this feature on the 5DIII, because that would let you forget about the missing EC in M mode, right?!


See here:

2. So then you are like well they added min. shutter speed to Auto ISO now so at least we might be able to often get away with using Av mode instead. BUT, they make the maximum allowed min speed only 1/250th??? They limit it from 1 second to 1/250th?! What!? What does 1/250th do you for action?? And if you are using 1 second long exposures and stuff you surely have enough time to adjust the ISO as needed manually anyway.
Wow. It is so beyond absurd. Why on earth do they limit it? It makes no sense.

 

[briansquibb]

The trouble with Auto ISO in Av mode now is that the camera chooses changing ISO before changing shutter speed and I hate that. Shutter speed doesn't affect image quality much after it reaches a minimum threshold for getting the shot, but ISO does.

If I could tell the camera to ONLY change ISO to keep the shutter speed from dipping below, say 1/1000, otherwise change shutter speed, that would solve my problem of constantly having to make small adjustments. As it stands now, I'm constantly making adjustments to minimize ISO and still get the shot.

That would be very powerful and be extremely helpful to sports togs who deal with rapidly changing lighting conditions.

That is the only thing that I am missing as well, on my Canon 60D! (besides microfocus adjustment) 8)


AND, I am guessing LetTheRightLensIn would be satisfied as well with this feature on the 5DIII, because that would let you forget about the missing EC in M mode, right?!


See here:

2. So then you are like well they added min. shutter speed to Auto ISO now so at least we might be able to often get away with using Av mode instead. BUT, they make the maximum allowed min speed only 1/250th??? They limit it from 1 second to 1/250th?! What!? What does 1/250th do you for action?? And if you are using 1 second long exposures and stuff you surely have enough time to adjust the ISO as needed manually anyway.
Wow. It is so beyond absurd. Why on earth do they limit it? It makes no sense.

This is done in the 1D4 - perhaps just adding it to the 5DIII would resolve the issue

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

This is done in the 1D4 - perhaps just adding it to the 5DIII would resolve the issue

I agree.

I do think Canon have had a "scared to hit the 1 series too much" mentality. The 1 series cameras have several options which would be really useful which are just firmware tweaks. They have been deliberately NOT included, even those the code is available. These things help photographers do their jobs. Very few photographers will pay another £2k for these features, so by not including them Canon are actually not helping photographers.

I can understand them not putting those options on a very low end cameras but - let's be honest - the 5d is a pro camera and used by a massive amount of pros all over the world. The same was true with the 5dii. So, as a new mentality: "who buys the 5d and what do they need".

As a key point, I had the money to buy a 1dx but decided not to since the 5d3's shutter is quieter, especially in silent mode. That means suddenly I can't have all of the extra options that the 1 series has. That doesn't seem fair - it's not that I won't pay, it's that I don't want that camera.

I know with the 5d they've moved away from their previous path of "don't hit the 1 series" some way but I think they could go further:
* 1d - you're paying for shutter actuations, fps, build quality.
* 5d - same options and internal electronics but not as fast / solid / strong / weather proof / long lasting.

...or bring out a "3d" which is a 5d but with upgraded internals like the 1 series and charge £4k for it. But at least give people the choice.

Let's face it, the people who want a 1d now are mainly sports photographers, maybe some PJ, people who shoot in all weather conditions or people who shoot gazillions of frames. Otherwise the 5d (with a battery grip) is pretty much the same camera.

So Canon - you've done well with this latest round, but giving people more useful options with the 5d will help to gain you more respect from your customers and stop the constant comparisons with "the other side" who do seem to have a different mentality :

 

[sarangiman]

I just posted this in another Auto ISO thread, but thought it was relevant here:

Auto ISO in the presence of attached flash:

In M mode, whether the flash is in 'bounce' mode or not, Auto ISO locks ISO at 400.

In A/Tv modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-400, again whether or not flash in 'bounce' mode.

In P/A+ modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-1600 if flash is in 'bounce' mode; ISO 100-400 if not in 'bounce' mode.

My head hurts. Anyone want to explain the rationale behind this?

 

[bloodstupid]

Canon rumours talks about a feature-update firmware, i wonder if it will improve AutoIso.

 

[AvTvM]

Auto ISO in the presence of attached flash:
In M mode, whether the flash is in 'bounce' mode or not, Auto ISO locks ISO at 400.
In A/Tv modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-400, again whether or not flash in 'bounce' mode.
In P/A+ modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-1600 if flash is in 'bounce' mode; ISO 100-400 if not in 'bounce' mode.
My head hurts. Anyone want to explain the rationale behind this?

Actually, saying 100-400 if flash is not bounced, is not quite correct. It will always set ISO at ISO 400 in all shooting modes and ONLY go down to ISO 100 in order to avoid over-exposure.

So when ISO 100 would render a perfectly exposed capture with (fill) flash, the cam will still go to ISO 400 in Auto-ISO. This behaviour is unchanged form previous EOS models ... e.g. 5D2 and 7D.

 

[sarangiman]

Oh wow, that's even worse behavior than I thought! Thanks for the clarification. Maybe they think ISO 400 is best b/c it's right around unity gain?

 

[briansquibb]

I shoot in full manual + fec with flash so I am not to sure how disastrous it is

 

[AvTvM]

well ... I guess it would be very naive to expect Canon being able to program meaningful Auto-ISO behaviour for use with flash when they are ot even capable to implement "really right"AUto-ISO without flash ... ;D

But, Auto-ISO With flash is a truly difficult animal ... desirable camera behaviour depends on:

Type of flash used:
* pop-up flash [ok, not on the 5D3 : ] with little power and no possibility to bounce
* speedlite on cam in hot-shoe - direct or bounced
* all sorts of wireless flash use
each type dmands a different approach

Desired balance of ambient adn flash light ... if anyon, then only the photog knows, what he wants in a specific situation. Program-AE (of which Auto-ISO is one emanation) generally try to achieve "even lighting".

Other than with flashless Auto-ISO, Nikon has also not yet solved AUto-ISO with flash. They changed their programmed model from the D90 onwoards, inclduing D300s, D3s, D5100, D7000 ... BUT they do not even provide the little table plus small-print footnotes Canon includes in their manuals.

That is why the Nikon uiser base is still guessing, what exactly is going on when using AUto-ISO with flash on their cameras ... as can be seen in many confused forum threads on the subject. Canon on the other hand, has taken a completely ludicrous approach, but at least they state in their little table plus small-print footnotes, what hapless measures their cameras will take in the various shooting modes with Auto-ISO and flash active.

Canon engineers must have come to the conclusion, that ISO 400 maximizes the chance to achieve "even lighting" between ambuient and flash light in most situations - so that's why the just turn the cam to ISO 400.

When an attached flash is bounced, they (correctly) assume, that less flash light arrives on the scene and decided to have the cam go up to ISO1600 ... why only in full Auto-modes (P, A+) but not in Av or TV ... no one knows, they will not talk about it. :

On the Nikon side, the cam will go up to maximum upper ISO limit as set by user ... using pop-up flash, it will go to shortest X-sync time (in shooting modes where cam determines shutter speed) and then immediately start raising ISO all the way up ... so you have tons of threads, where Nikonians complain, that their cam uses ISO6400 in Auto-ISO any time they use the pop-up flash ... ;-)

It might really be worthwhile to get a group of photographers together to develop a "really right Auto-ISO with and without flash white-paper", then send it to the camera manufacturers telling them to "go and program it, folks"!

 

[sarangiman]

Yeah I don't see myself particularly using Auto ISO with a flash, precisely b/c I want to control background vs. foreground exposure. Can someone paint a scenario where Auto ISO would make sense w/ flash?

Again, I suspect ISO 400 is chosen b/c it's right around unity gain for this camera & the 5D Mark II. For a camera with very low read noise, there'd be very little gain in shooting above unity gain... perhaps one stop above unity gain would still be better than shooting at unity gain & adding 1-stop exposure in post simply because of rounding/quantization errors. But of course, this philosophy is more for a theoretical 'ISO-less' camera, which Canon is far from because of its poor read noise.

Ironically, the Nikon D800/D7000 are much closer to this theoretical 'ISO-less' camera... hence I'd be much more comfortable just leaving the Nikon at ISO 400, heck ISO 100, using the flash to light my subject, & then pulling up exposure in dark areas in post. I'm scared to do the latter with my Canon, especially my 5D Mark III which shows more (vertical) banding than any of the previous 5D series cameras I've owned.

 

[AvTvM]

Yeah I don't see myself particularly using Auto ISO with a flash, precisely b/c I want to control background vs. foreground exposure. Can someone paint a scenario where Auto ISO would make sense w/ flash?

I agree ... Auto-ISO plus flash seems to make sense primarily for those users that want to use a DSLR as "hi-end" P&S camera. "Uncle Charlie with his cam at the wedding reception of his niece" type of scenario ... let the cam do "all the thinking" ... no clue whatsoever regarding balance of ambient/flash light ... and "even lighting" desired by all parties concerned - behind and in front of camera. ;-)

That's probably the reason Canon lets the cam go to ISO1600 with (bounced) flash only in P/A+ shooting modes ... uncle Charlie has learned "from the pro's" that he should not fire the flash straight into people's face at close distance like he did for the first 30 years if his photo-amateur career ... but rather bounce it! ;-)

btw nothing wrong with that scenario, as fas as I am concerned ... why should a DSLR not be able to also handle this?

 

[sarangiman]

Yeah I'm still learning about Auto ISO. I had no use for it up till now, given the useless implementation of Auto ISO in the 5D Mark II...

 

[sarangiman]

Since I previously commented on the Nikons approaching the theoretical 'ISO-less' camera, I figured I'd report back with a quick test I did.

With the Canon 5D Mark III, b/c of high read noise, it's important to expose the image at the highest ISO that doesn't clip highlights. In fact, I found an ISO 6400 image to be cleaner than an ISO 1600 image, deprived of 2 stops of light, then pushed 2 stops in post.

On the Nikon D7000, an ISO 400 image, deprived 4 stops, then pushed 4 stops in post looks every bit as good as the ISO 6400 shots. Heck, even the ISO 200 image, deprived 5 stops, then pushed 5 stops in post looks almost on par with the ISO 6400 shot. That's how little the electronics/read noise mess with low signals in these EXMOR sensors.

Meanwhile, the Canon 5D Mark III started falling apart at ISO 1600, deprived of 2 stops.

Incredible. Again, given the poor read noise on the Canon 5D series, it really behooves them to implement Auto ISO properly. Correct ISO is clearly much more important to nail on such noisy Canon sensors than it is on the latest Nikons, if you're concerned with image quality that is.

 

[briansquibb]

Incredible. Again, given the poor read noise on Canons, it really behooves them to implement Auto ISO properly. Correct ISO is clearly much more important to nail on the Canons than it is on the latest Nikons, if you're concerned with image quality that is.

Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)

 

[AvTvM]

Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)

to the contrary. We have PROVEN in this very thread that ALL Canon DSLRs to date - including the EOS 1D Mk. IV - have Auto-ISO implementations that are way below the current "gold standard" and really leave a lot to be desired ... to say the least.

 

[briansquibb]

Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)

to the contrary. We have PROVEN in this very thread that ALL Canon DSLRs to date - including the EOS 1D Mk. IV - have Auto-ISO implementations that are way below the current "gold standard" and really leave a lot to be desired ... to say the least.

I have to disagree as the 1D4 has proper auto iso - it was me that proved it did. What you are saying is that you would like the implemention changed which is a subjective view which therefore cannot be proved as it is just an opinion.

And the proof about the read noise of the 1DS3 - which was the top standard when released?

 

[sarangiman]

Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)

Fair enough Brian, I've modified my statement to talk only of the 5D series.

Although, w/ a read noise of 21.5e- & a sensor very similar to the 5DII on the 1Ds3, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make?

 

[briansquibb]

Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)

Fair enough Brian, I've modified my statement to talk only of the 5D series.

Although, w/ a read noise of 21.5e- & a sensor very similar to the 5DII on the 1Ds3, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make?

The 1DS3 read noise is about the same as the D3 showing that not all Canon sensors are that far behind those of Nikon.

 

[sarangiman]

The 1DS3 read noise is about the same as the D3 showing that not all Canon sensors are that far behind those of Nikon.

That statement doesn't take into account banding & fixed pattern noise, which is actually one of the most offensive qualities of my lower-ISO pushed exposures (the ones that'd have benefitted from a higher ISO) on my 5D Mark III.

 

[briansquibb]

The 1DS3 read noise is about the same as the D3 showing that not all Canon sensors are that far behind those of Nikon.

That statement doesn't take into account banding & fixed pattern noise, which is actually one of the most offensive qualities of my lower-ISO pushed exposures (the ones that'd have benefitted from a higher ISO) on my 5D Mark III.

I dont get that on the 1DS3 until you get to 3200 (H) Up to iso 800 is clean - but then I dont need to push significantly