The High ISO Scam?

creative69 · 04-10-2016, 08:07 AM - **1 Like**

It seems as though Hi ISO specs on cameras is now the latest sales gimmick a -la the previous / ongoing mega-pixel war. Bear in mind this is only my view, I mean whats the point of these hi iso specs? the images look ridiculous. For me I would like the advancements to be made at normal or low iso's. Its obvious that cameras still have noise at base iso levels so why are manufacturers seemingly ignoring this end of the scale? As a Pentax newcomer it does seem as if Pentax are rather biased to images of Landscapes and scenery at least as far as their marketing goes. In fact the main reason I have invested in Pentax is because of some of the excellent people images posted by users on this forum. Even looking at the new K-1 lens library the images are not particularly selling it to a portrait photographer like myself. Different lenses with the same subjects. Anyway I have some hope that the K-1 will deliver in the Low- normal iso range as I will never need to go above iso 12000 for what I do.

john.margetts · 04-10-2016, 08:14 AM - **1 Like**

A lot of the specs they sell cameras on are worthless to most photographer in practise. I have never used my camera's highest ISO setting, nor am I likely to. Same with frames per second - my fastest is about one frame per ten minutes and I don't care what the camera is capable of. Video - shall never use it.

**Robin** · 04-10-2016, 08:20 AM

I agree that there is a lot of hype about high ISO. How about going below 100? As far as I know (open to correction) only Leica offers DSLR with something less than 100 ISO.

**jatrax** · 04-10-2016, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by creative69

K-1 will deliver in the Low- normal iso range as I will never need to go above iso 12000 for what I do.

12,000?? I very rarely shoot above ISO 400. LOL Image quality is very important to me and I find ISO 800 to be unusable on the K-3. I'm hoping to be able to use 800 or even 1600 on the K-1 but we will see. I realize my requirements are different from others and I do see quite nice images taken at higher ISO's, but for my work I stick to 400 and lower at the moment.

Originally posted by creative69

it does seem as if Pentax are rather biased to images of Landscapes and scenery at least as far as their marketing goes.

I would not go by that much, Pentax has not until the K-1 done any marketing for maybe 4 years. The K-1 is the first real marketing campaign I have really since the 1980's. Still, Pentax is billing the K-1 as "field camera" and the feature set should appeal to those who shoot that way.

Originally posted by creative69

Anyway I have some hope that the K-1 will deliver in the Low- normal iso range

I have more than hope, same sensor as the D800 I believe so I expect that level of performance or a little better. However, the K-3 already delivers in that range so why the concern?

Racer X 69 · 04-10-2016, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by Robin

I agree that there is a lot of hype about high ISO. How about going below 100? As far as I know (open to correction) only Leica offers DSLR with something less than 100 ISO.

My K5IIs goes to 80 ISO.

**Digitalis** · 04-10-2016, 09:19 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by creative69

Bear in mind this is only my view, I mean whats the point of these hi iso specs?

I consider the usable range of my Pentax K5IIs to be from ISO80 to ISO 12800, anything beyond that requires a lot of cleaning up.

Originally posted by creative69

Its obvious that cameras still have noise at base iso levels so why are manufacturers seemingly ignoring this end of the scale?

The funny thing is CG animation studios frequently add noise to their films make them look realistic, Noise is an inherent characteristic of digital imaging. There are people who specialise in Zero-noise photography, but personally I think that approach is utterly pointless.

Originally posted by creative69

Even looking at the new K-1 lens library the images are not particularly selling it to a portrait photographer like myself

The Pentax digital 645 cameras do superbly at portraiture, The K-1 with either the FA77mm f/1.8 Limited or FA*85mm f/1.4 should be also excellent for this purpose. However flash sync limits make Cameras such as the Leica S much more attractive for outdoor on-location work than the Pentax 645 cameras. The K-1 with it's 1/200th Sync speed is a step forward in increasing the practicality of using flash outdoors.

**sergysergy** · 04-10-2016, 09:27 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Robin

I agree that there is a lot of hype about high ISO. How about going below 100? As far as I know (open to correction) only Leica offers DSLR with something less than 100 ISO.

Originally posted by Racer X 69

My K5IIs goes to 80 ISO.

and k5

creative69 · 04-10-2016, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

12,000?? I very rarely shoot above ISO 400. LOL Image quality is very important to me and I find ISO 800 to be unusable on the K-3. I'm hoping to be able to use 800 or even 1600 on the K-1 but we will see. I realize my requirements are different from others and I do see quite nice images taken at higher ISO's, but for my work I stick to 400 and lower at the moment.

I would not go by that much, Pentax has not until the K-1 done any marketing for maybe 4 years. The K-1 is the first real marketing campaign I have really since the 1980's. Still, Pentax is billing the K-1 as "field camera" and the feature set should appeal to those who shoot that way.

I have more than hope, same sensor as the D800 I believe so I expect that level of performance or a little better. However, the K-3 already delivers in that range so why the concern?

I would be happy with that although I believe the D8xx are ISO 64 native.

SteveM · 04-10-2016, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

12,000?? I very rarely shoot above ISO 400. LOL Image quality is very important to me and I find ISO 800 to be unusable on the K-3.

I find the same, but the K3 excels in other areas. I use my Df to 6000 or higher and end up with reasonable results (after DeNoise), but then again it's only 16MP. There are times when being able to shoot handheld is low light is very handy.

I would assume high ISO will get better as sensor technology develops.

creative69 · 04-10-2016, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

The Pentax digital 645 cameras do superbly at portraiture, The K-1 with either the FA77mm f/1.8 Limited or FA*85mm f/1.4 should be also excellent for this purpose. However flash sync limits make Cameras such as the Leica S much more attractive for outdoor on-location work than the Pentax 645 cameras. The K-1 with it's 1/200th Sync speed is a step forward in increasing the practicality of using flash outdoors.

Agree... 645z seems to be the first Pentax camera with a marketing push towards portrait and studio photography. I have ordered the K-1 with the 77 Limited based upon what you were thinking, should be a nice setup for studio stuff, and dare I say it Capture One tethering would be amazing.

stevebrot · 04-10-2016, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by creative69

It seems as though Hi ISO specs on cameras is now the latest sales gimmick a -la the previous / ongoing mega-pixel war. Bear in mind this is only my view,

I tend to agree, though would caution that the world has changed a lot in the five years or so decade in regards to high ISO (above 1600) quality and usability. The current claimed top end numbers are sort of silly unless you are shooting for documentation purposes. OTOH, with my K-3, I have no problem allowing auto-ISO with a top end of 6400 for some types of shooting (street or snapshots) and up to ~~25600~~ 12800 in some cases. The noise is apparent, but cleans up very nicely with available tools. With the K10D I purchased in 2007 anything above ISO 800 was essentially unusable. On the K-3, 800 is the top end of where I will shoot if I am doing fine work and am willing to spend time in PP on noise reduction though I usually shoot at 100 or 200.

Steve

jeff knight · 04-10-2016, 09:37 AM

It looks like the K-1 will give us quite usable high iso images up to 3200. I'm speaking as a very picky person who never shoots over iso 800 with my aps-c camera.

One thing not frequently discussed: Although it looks like the K-1 will give you much better high iso performance than it's aps-c predecessors, you are going to have to stop most lenses down more to deal with the higher resolution. This can effectively cancel the advantage. It depends on the lens and your own critical standards.

I agree about the high iso scam and would never use 12000 or over, unless I was employed as an investigative reporter shooting a difficult subject at night, and that's pretty unlikely!

jimr-pdx · 04-10-2016, 09:38 AM

In general I agree, but if you like to know your one-in-500 shot is covered then it can be a comfort. Here's an ePM2 crop (~60% crop?) at iso 4k and 200k, straight jpeg, nr set to Low. I think this is one click down from max ISO, exposure = EV3. Not a poster candidate but quite acceptable to me for jpeg.

The Sony 4:3 sensor is yet another sweet-16 winner!

**jatrax** · 04-10-2016, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by creative69

believe the D8xx are ISO 64 native

I have seen that argued both ways (native and not). But I've no idea. I did like the ISO 80 on the K-5 and was hoping to see that on the K-1, or 64, or 50. But alas, no.

Someplace I read something about why Pentax chose 100 ISO instead of the same as the Nikon, but I cannot find it right now. Not sure anymore if it was real info or speculation, though.

I was processing some images last night that I had shot at ISO 2500 on the K-3II. I spent some time with them and out of about 2 dozen I still have 2 that I might send on to the agency, or not. They just are not up to my standards, and though they are really nice shots I may just delete the lot. Just re-enforces my opinion that anything over over ISO 800 is a waste of time.

stevebrot · 04-10-2016, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

Someplace I read something about why Pentax chose 100 ISO instead of the same as the Nikon, but I cannot find it right now. Not sure anymore if it was real info or speculation, though.

That is my take as well. Some claim that Nikon's digital ISO equivalence is skewed relative to that of other makers. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, IMHO and if a Pentax camera at ISO 100 performs similarly to Nikon product at ~1/4 stop lower, that is fine with me.

Steve

04-10-2016, 08:07 AM - 1 Like	#1
creative69 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 121	The High ISO Scam? It seems as though Hi ISO specs on cameras is now the latest sales gimmick a -la the previous / ongoing mega-pixel war. Bear in mind this is only my view, I mean whats the point of these hi iso specs? the images look ridiculous. For me I would like the advancements to be made at normal or low iso's. Its obvious that cameras still have noise at base iso levels so why are manufacturers seemingly ignoring this end of the scale? As a Pentax newcomer it does seem as if Pentax are rather biased to images of Landscapes and scenery at least as far as their marketing goes. In fact the main reason I have invested in Pentax is because of some of the excellent people images posted by users on this forum. Even looking at the new K-1 lens library the images are not particularly selling it to a portrait photographer like myself. Different lenses with the same subjects. Anyway I have some hope that the K-1 will deliver in the Low- normal iso range as I will never need to go above iso 12000 for what I do.

04-10-2016, 09:37 AM	#11
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by creative69 It seems as though Hi ISO specs on cameras is now the latest sales gimmick a -la the previous / ongoing mega-pixel war. Bear in mind this is only my view, I tend to agree, though would caution that the world has changed a lot in the five years or so decade in regards to high ISO (above 1600) quality and usability. The current claimed top end numbers are sort of silly unless you are shooting for documentation purposes. OTOH, with my K-3, I have no problem allowing auto-ISO with a top end of 6400 for some types of shooting (street or snapshots) and up to ~~25600~~ 12800 in some cases. The noise is apparent, but cleans up very nicely with available tools. With the K10D I purchased in 2007 anything above ISO 800 was essentially unusable. On the K-3, 800 is the top end of where I will shoot if I am doing fine work and am willing to spend time in PP on noise reduction though I usually shoot at 100 or 200. Steve Last edited by stevebrot; 04-10-2016 at 12:41 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why was the High ISO NR a problem on the K3?	Culture	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	15	10-09-2015 08:46 PM
Nature High ISO and high shutter speeds	charliezap	Post Your Photos!	3	09-15-2015 02:10 PM
What's the deal with K-3 poor high ISO performance	Stavri	Pentax DSLR Discussion	49	08-21-2014 03:02 PM
People K-5 high ISO... how high can we really go...	igor	Post Your Photos!	2	03-24-2012 01:10 AM
K-7 high ISO vs K20D high ISO	supa007	Pentax DSLR Discussion	72	05-10-2010 04:24 PM

04-10-2016, 08:14 AM - 1 Like	#2
john.margetts Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 84	A lot of the specs they sell cameras on are worthless to most photographer in practise. I have never used my camera's highest ISO setting, nor am I likely to. Same with frames per second - my fastest is about one frame per ten minutes and I don't care what the camera is capable of. Video - shall never use it.

04-10-2016, 08:20 AM	#3
Robin Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: Pietermaritzburg Photos: Gallery Posts: 432	I agree that there is a lot of hype about high ISO. How about going below 100? As far as I know (open to correction) only Leica offers DSLR with something less than 100 ISO.

04-10-2016, 08:41 AM	#4
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by creative69 K-1 will deliver in the Low- normal iso range as I will never need to go above iso 12000 for what I do. 12,000?? I very rarely shoot above ISO 400. LOL Image quality is very important to me and I find ISO 800 to be unusable on the K-3. I'm hoping to be able to use 800 or even 1600 on the K-1 but we will see. I realize my requirements are different from others and I do see quite nice images taken at higher ISO's, but for my work I stick to 400 and lower at the moment. Originally posted by creative69 it does seem as if Pentax are rather biased to images of Landscapes and scenery at least as far as their marketing goes. I would not go by that much, Pentax has not until the K-1 done any marketing for maybe 4 years. The K-1 is the first real marketing campaign I have really since the 1980's. Still, Pentax is billing the K-1 as "field camera" and the feature set should appeal to those who shoot that way. Originally posted by creative69 Anyway I have some hope that the K-1 will deliver in the Low- normal iso range I have more than hope, same sensor as the D800 I believe so I expect that level of performance or a little better. However, the K-3 already delivers in that range so why the concern?

04-10-2016, 08:48 AM	#5
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,064	Originally posted by Robin I agree that there is a lot of hype about high ISO. How about going below 100? As far as I know (open to correction) only Leica offers DSLR with something less than 100 ISO. My K5IIs goes to 80 ISO.

04-10-2016, 09:19 AM - 1 Like	#6
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by creative69 Bear in mind this is only my view, I mean whats the point of these hi iso specs? I consider the usable range of my Pentax K5IIs to be from ISO80 to ISO 12800, anything beyond that requires a lot of cleaning up. Originally posted by creative69 Its obvious that cameras still have noise at base iso levels so why are manufacturers seemingly ignoring this end of the scale? The funny thing is CG animation studios frequently add noise to their films make them look realistic, Noise is an inherent characteristic of digital imaging. There are people who specialise in Zero-noise photography, but personally I think that approach is utterly pointless. Originally posted by creative69 Even looking at the new K-1 lens library the images are not particularly selling it to a portrait photographer like myself The Pentax digital 645 cameras do superbly at portraiture, The K-1 with either the FA77mm f/1.8 Limited or FA*85mm f/1.4 should be also excellent for this purpose. However flash sync limits make Cameras such as the Leica S much more attractive for outdoor on-location work than the Pentax 645 cameras. The K-1 with it's 1/200th Sync speed is a step forward in increasing the practicality of using flash outdoors.

04-10-2016, 09:27 AM - 1 Like	#7
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,170	Originally posted by Robin I agree that there is a lot of hype about high ISO. How about going below 100? As far as I know (open to correction) only Leica offers DSLR with something less than 100 ISO. Originally posted by Racer X 69 My K5IIs goes to 80 ISO. and k5

04-10-2016, 09:28 AM	#8
creative69 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 121 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax 12,000?? I very rarely shoot above ISO 400. LOL Image quality is very important to me and I find ISO 800 to be unusable on the K-3. I'm hoping to be able to use 800 or even 1600 on the K-1 but we will see. I realize my requirements are different from others and I do see quite nice images taken at higher ISO's, but for my work I stick to 400 and lower at the moment. I would not go by that much, Pentax has not until the K-1 done any marketing for maybe 4 years. The K-1 is the first real marketing campaign I have really since the 1980's. Still, Pentax is billing the K-1 as "field camera" and the feature set should appeal to those who shoot that way. I have more than hope, same sensor as the D800 I believe so I expect that level of performance or a little better. However, the K-3 already delivers in that range so why the concern? I would be happy with that although I believe the D8xx are ISO 64 native.

04-10-2016, 09:33 AM	#9
SteveM Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,294	Originally posted by jatrax 12,000?? I very rarely shoot above ISO 400. LOL Image quality is very important to me and I find ISO 800 to be unusable on the K-3. I find the same, but the K3 excels in other areas. I use my Df to 6000 or higher and end up with reasonable results (after DeNoise), but then again it's only 16MP. There are times when being able to shoot handheld is low light is very handy. I would assume high ISO will get better as sensor technology develops.

04-10-2016, 09:34 AM	#10
creative69 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 121 Original Poster	Originally posted by Digitalis The Pentax digital 645 cameras do superbly at portraiture, The K-1 with either the FA77mm f/1.8 Limited or FA*85mm f/1.4 should be also excellent for this purpose. However flash sync limits make Cameras such as the Leica S much more attractive for outdoor on-location work than the Pentax 645 cameras. The K-1 with it's 1/200th Sync speed is a step forward in increasing the practicality of using flash outdoors. Agree... 645z seems to be the first Pentax camera with a marketing push towards portrait and studio photography. I have ordered the K-1 with the 77 Limited based upon what you were thinking, should be a nice setup for studio stuff, and dare I say it Capture One tethering would be amazing.

04-10-2016, 09:37 AM	#12
jeff knight Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Pacific Northwest USA Posts: 261	It looks like the K-1 will give us quite usable high iso images up to 3200. I'm speaking as a very picky person who never shoots over iso 800 with my aps-c camera. One thing not frequently discussed: Although it looks like the K-1 will give you much better high iso performance than it's aps-c predecessors, you are going to have to stop most lenses down more to deal with the higher resolution. This can effectively cancel the advantage. It depends on the lens and your own critical standards. I agree about the high iso scam and would never use 12000 or over, unless I was employed as an investigative reporter shooting a difficult subject at night, and that's pretty unlikely!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-10-2016, 09:38 AM	#13
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	In general I agree, but if you like to know your one-in-500 shot is covered then it can be a comfort. Here's an ePM2 crop (~60% crop?) at iso 4k and 200k, straight jpeg, nr set to Low. I think this is one click down from max ISO, exposure = EV3. Not a poster candidate but quite acceptable to me for jpeg. The Sony 4:3 sensor is yet another sweet-16 winner!

04-10-2016, 09:39 AM	#14
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by creative69 believe the D8xx are ISO 64 native I have seen that argued both ways (native and not). But I've no idea. I did like the ISO 80 on the K-5 and was hoping to see that on the K-1, or 64, or 50. But alas, no. Someplace I read something about why Pentax chose 100 ISO instead of the same as the Nikon, but I cannot find it right now. Not sure anymore if it was real info or speculation, though. I was processing some images last night that I had shot at ISO 2500 on the K-3II. I spent some time with them and out of about 2 dozen I still have 2 that I might send on to the agency, or not. They just are not up to my standards, and though they are really nice shots I may just delete the lot. Just re-enforces my opinion that anything over over ISO 800 is a waste of time.

04-10-2016, 10:12 AM	#15
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by jatrax Someplace I read something about why Pentax chose 100 ISO instead of the same as the Nikon, but I cannot find it right now. Not sure anymore if it was real info or speculation, though. That is my take as well. Some claim that Nikon's digital ISO equivalence is skewed relative to that of other makers. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, IMHO and if a Pentax camera at ISO 100 performs similarly to Nikon product at ~1/4 stop lower, that is fine with me. Steve