ICEINSPACE
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
Full Moon 100%
|
|
24-09-2009, 10:32 PM
|
|
stumblebum
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Maroochydore
Posts: 761
|
|
ISO setting poll
As was mentioned in another post lets see what people are generally using for their ISO settings
|
24-09-2009, 10:39 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Monto
Posts: 16,738
|
|
ISO 800 for me, mostly.
Great avatar Mick. There's a little bit of Sheldon in all of us.
|
25-09-2009, 09:01 AM
|
|
IIS Member #671
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,159
|
|
ISO-400. Anything higher and you're asking for trouble.
Regards,
Humayun
|
25-09-2009, 10:55 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Monto
Posts: 16,738
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane
ISO-400. Anything higher and you're asking for trouble.
Regards,
Humayun
|
Trouble is my middle name Humayun.
|
25-09-2009, 11:51 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 4,563
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry B
|
Interesting. Shame it's with such an old camera. It would be interesting to see for one of the new line of cameras (5D/50D/500D).
Roger.
|
25-09-2009, 03:34 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Warrnambool
Posts: 12,452
|
|
I never shoot any higher than 400 ISO, maybe on the rare occasion it could be 500, but this is not often.
Leon
|
26-09-2009, 02:57 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,944
|
|
ISO 800 and I stand by it. I have seen plenty of good images taken with this level of sensitivity.
|
26-09-2009, 09:00 PM
|
|
avandonk
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,786
|
|
Read noise is far less at 1600 ISO than at lower for a twelve bit DSLR. If you want to map very faint stuff to your available dynamic range then use 1600 ISO.
You will lose dynamic range at high ISO settings. Bright stars will saturate but at least you have the faint data.
If you need a high dynamic range then 400 ISO is a good compromise.
That is why I am working on my HDR process.
There is no correct answer it all depends on the objects dynamic range and your optical train including camera.
All data for this image was taken at 1600 ISO. 11MB
http://d1355990.i49.quadrahosting.co...MCmosenhc2.jpg
See here
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ad.php?t=50390
Bert
Last edited by avandonk; 26-09-2009 at 09:13 PM.
|
28-09-2009, 01:19 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hahndorf, South Australia
Posts: 4,262
|
|
iso1600 subs and lots of 'em.
I like to push for as much as I can get from the DSLR.
iso1600 seems to work pretty well on the 40D in my location - temperatures usually drop sharply at night in my neck of the woods so that's significant too.
1600 in summer is a P.I.T.A!!
No hard and fast as the replies indicate - experiment!
Doug
|
28-09-2009, 04:59 PM
|
|
Space Cadet
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,411
|
|
800 for me, when time is in short supply you need to catch as many photons as you can. I'd go 1600, buy on a 1000D it looks pretty bad.
|
16-12-2009, 07:31 PM
|
|
Amongst the stars
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Glen Innes, N.S.W.
Posts: 2,869
|
|
I like anything from 400 to 1600. Depends on the target. Bright nebs I use 400 and fainter objects I go higher to 800 or 1600 if it`s a cool night.
I have tried a comparison and all the images once stacked for the same period of time (say a hours worth) look pretty similar.
|
16-12-2009, 08:57 PM
|
|
Mostly harmless...
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 5,716
|
|
800 most of the time - 1600 rarely a goer at Qld temps. 400 if imaging an object with wide dynamic range (e.g Veil nebula has a bright star in the middle of it) or have the luxury of going for >1.5hrs worth of data.
|
17-12-2009, 02:09 PM
|
|
PI rules
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,631
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit
800 for me, when time is in short supply you need to catch as many photons as you can. I'd go 1600, buy on a 1000D it looks pretty bad.
|
The number of photons caught has nothing to do with the ISO setting. Photons hit the telescope objective and are reflected onto the sensor. Changing the ISO can't generate any more. If you expose at 400 ISO for 10 min or 800 ISO for 10 min, you collect exactly the same number of photons.
Geoff
|
17-12-2009, 02:11 PM
|
|
PI rules
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,631
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garyh
I like anything from 400 to 1600. Depends on the target. Bright nebs I use 400 and fainter objects I go higher to 800 or 1600 if it`s a cool night.
I have tried a comparison and all the images once stacked for the same period of time (say a hours worth) look pretty similar.
|
Very true. As long as you taking RAW and are not saturating pixels ISO is almost irrelevant.
Geoff
|
17-12-2009, 06:24 PM
|
|
IIS Member #671
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,159
|
|
ISO is relevant, though.
The higher the ISO, the more noise in your final image.
Stick with a lower ISO for a clean and (quite possibly) noise free image.
Regards,
Humayun
|
19-12-2009, 11:02 AM
|
|
Have scope will travel!
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Pitnacree NSW
Posts: 1,494
|
|
What about ISO setings when using filters e.g. Ha. Do you need to bump the iso up and use longer exposures?
Frank
|
21-12-2009, 11:24 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Monto
Posts: 16,738
|
|
In the near 3 months since this poll was posted I've taken on board what's been said.
I will only shoot in ISO 400 now.
The difference is incredible.
|
21-12-2009, 11:55 PM
|
|
IIS Member #671
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,159
|
|
Thank you for vindicating me, Jeanette.
Regards,
Humayun
|
22-12-2009, 12:13 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Monto
Posts: 16,738
|
|
The lure of more instant gratification when you use high iso's though is hard to resist.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT +10. The time is now 06:48 AM.
|
|