[todd]

i've generally been using 80-6400 too, but have raised it in some situations without regret. I read this thread last night and have been thinking about the statement about anything over 1600 being in camera software boost, and I am glad I read that as a reminder to not get too lazy, especially for the carefully composed shots, but in many situations, I'd still rather let the camera do the work....

[vonBaloney]

Another trick if you've got stacking software like PhotoAcute (which can also increase resolution) for stationary subjects is to take several shots of the same thing and stack them -- it puts them all together and removes the noise by keeping what's common between the images. The newer Photoshops also have stacking, but I haven't tried it -- don't know if it will remove noise or if it is just for focus stacking. PhotoAcute is really cool though.

[savoche]

I usually have auto-ISO set to 80-3200, but am not afraid of letting it fly when needed. I've had reasonable results at 20,000 ISO, but that of course requires more work with some noise reduction software.

I haven't tried printing this one yet - would be interesting to see how it fares at A3 size.



Edit: typos

[Timd]

I set auto ISO to 80 to 6400, but work on Av mode wiith back wheel on ISO. Green button switches to auto ISO. So I am happy with auto ISO for normal shots but can force the ISO way up or fix it low for special shots.

[amoringello]

Another trick if you've got stacking software like PhotoAcute (which can also increase resolution) for stationary subjects is to take several shots of the same thing and stack them -- it puts them all together and removes the noise by keeping what's common between the images. The newer Photoshops also have stacking, but I haven't tried it -- don't know if it will remove noise or if it is just for focus stacking. PhotoAcute is really cool though.

Is this included with the non-Extended version of CS6 now?
This used to be an option in the Extended version only. (perhaps not stacking, but at least the blending of stacked images). I have not seen a bullet point if this is supported in non-Extended now.

Also useful for removing pedestrians from slightly crowded tourist sites and slightly useful for merging for star trails, etc...



As for upper limit on auto ISO?
I set my upper limit to 12,800. Better to have some grain than blur.
You just really need to shoot some photos and get used to how your camera behaves. Then choose what is acceptable to your own taste and needs.

[andre-mz5]

One of my favorites is sports/action and I use TAv withISO set to 100-6400. In a very dim sports arena I may up that to 100-10000.
I prefer to have a noisy shot above no shot at all. I will use Neat-image for denoising.

[jimr-pdx]

Mine's set at 5000 max. I saw a few shots at that setting and was more than happy with them. I do not doubt that 6400 would be similar but haven't done the testing to 'prove' to myself.

[snake]

I haven't an issue going straight to 6400. Afterward, I'm careful. The shots clean up very well, even to 12,500. The shots are great until 6400-8000, depending on the shot. After, they are perfectly usable.

Here's 6400:

[robgo2]

Thanks for all the responses, and keep them coming. I must say that some people have more confidence in NR programs than I do, and possibly more skill as well. I use both Topaz DeNoise 5 and Dfine, depending on the circumstances, but sometimes I cannot strike what I consider to be the proper balance between noise removal and detail preservation. To some extent, this may depend upon the ultimate output format and size. It is my understanding that the noise from the K-5 cleans up more readily than that from the K-7. In the end, I will have to find my own comfort range through trial and error.

Rob

[Docrwm]

I haven't an issue going straight to 6400. Afterward, I'm careful. The shots clean up very well, even to 12,500. The shots are great until 6400-8000, depending on the shot. After, they are perfectly usable.

Here's 6400:

I don't know if you noticed but there's some really heavy purple fringing in that shot

[JinDesu]

I'll jump in with one more statement:

If I were using Tav mode in which I get full control of shutter speed and aperture, I would use the full range, up to 51200.
But in Av mode, I would set the upper limit to 12,800.

[dosdan]

Thanks for all the responses, and keep them coming. I must say that some people have more confidence in NR programs than I do, and possibly more skill as well. I use both Topaz DeNoise 5 and Dfine, depending on the circumstances, but sometimes I cannot strike what I consider to be the proper balance between noise removal and detail preservation.

My tolerance level in the noise vs detail balancing act is fairly low. I don't like going past ISO4000. Even that looks desperate to me. The fine detail has gone. Remember, you're viewing smallish images on the web. OK for this forum or FaceBook, but if it's a good shot you wanted to print out, well that may be another matter. This is, after all, an APS-C sensor. Even with a QE of 46% (Sensorgen - digital camera sensor data) you can't expect the impossible.

[robgo2]

My tolerance level in the noise vs detail balancing act is fairly low. I don't like going past ISO4000. Even that looks desperate to me. The fine detail has gone. Remember, you're viewing smallish images on the web. OK for this forum or FaceBook, but if it's a good shot you wanted to print out, well that may be another matter. This is, after all, an APS-C sensor. Even with a QE of 46% (Sensorgen - digital camera sensor data) you can't expect the impossible.

My early experimentation suggests an auto-ISO range of 80-3200. This does not mean that I would never boost ISO higher in a pinch, but I prefer to limit noise to a level that I can easily clean up without doing too much damage in the process. To me this is important, as I am a devoted printer, and I need clean, detailed files for that purpose. For posting images on the web, noise is much less critical.

Rob

[vonBaloney]

I always add grain as the last step before printing something anyway -- for "artsy" stuff I don't like the clinical look of digital images if they are too clean, but nevertheless the cleaner they are at capture the better.

[fotogaffer]

I also have it set from 80-6400 and agree that motion blur is more unacceptable than noise that can be dealt using NR software.