[UserAccessDenied]

The transition seems to be at ISO3200. At this ISO and above some processing cuts in. Interestingly even at low ISO there are some intensity values of zero, indicating that the camera always subtracts the dark current level.

Thanks for running this!

I'm gonna play around with my settings next time I go out.
But auto ISO 100-3200 sounds promising / with -2 EV compensation.

---------- Post added 12-14-16 at 08:30 AM ----------

I've never noticed that, in fact I regularly shoot with SR on, on a tripod, and still find it useful. The only time I turn it off is with the 2 second delay, and even that's a bummer. I makes things tough shooting from a windy ride, when the tripod may vibrate.

Don't know what to tell ya...

Maybe I just have an extremely steady hand?
I've definitely noticed degradation in IQ from SR with a monopod. Even sometimes when handheld if I'm using a tree or some form of cross brace to shoot my subject.

There are also times when SR has saved my image, but typically these are those super windy days.
It's a nice feature to have when I need it. But certainly not something I rely on.

[normhead]

OK, here's a photo, .... maybe you see a problem here. The exposure is 1/20 at 60mm... where is the issue caused by SR?
Or maybe you can show us what you're talking about?

1:1




I have over 1000 images i my porch_birds folder, almost all of them razor sharp, almost all of them shot on a tripod with SR on...


SO, I have extensive experience and haven't seen the issue... but I'm willing to examine some images if you provide them , if for no other reason to see if i agree with your assessment of the situation.

[UserAccessDenied]

OK, here's a photo, .... maybe you see a problem here. The exposure is 1/20 at 60mm... where is the issue caused by SR?
Or maybe you can show us what you're talking about?

1:1




I have over 1000 images i my porch_birds folder, almost all of them razor sharp, almost all of them shot on a tripod with SR on...


SO, I have extensive experience and haven't seen the issue... but I'm willing to examine some images if you provide them , if for no other reason to see if i agree with your assessment of the situation.

What's your deal man?
I'm just saying my experience shows SR can cause problems when I'm shooting from a monopod.
You don't always have to take the defensive...

If you have better luck with SR on while using a tripod, so be it!

I think a lot of people here agree that SR should be off when shooting from a tripod. But even then, do what works for you.

If you really want example photos, I can setup a test when I get home from work today.
Unless you're just being facetious?

[normhead]

Let's not get excited here, but yes I'd really like to see what you're talking about... who knows, maybe it's affecting my photos but I'm just not seeing it. IN any case, this has been repeated often enough, if one of the proponents would take the time to actually show us it might help. I have actually had to talk to others about this, in wildlife threads, because they were suffering from motion blur, and they didn't understand that SR is needed even on a tripod, if the tripod isn't locked. SO, I have in other threads had to correct those who listened to this advice.... because they were not getting as good results as they could have.

I know what not using SR causes, and I've seen the results, I'm completely in the dark as to what problems it causes.

I know in many of my situations it's dead wrong, but maybe in others situations SR is an issue. I'd like to sort it out with some images. Many times in the past, I've had situations like this were it turned out, the problem was not what the person thought it was. I've also had times when, when I do what they do, I get the same issue, but realized, I just don't do what they do.

I'm just trying to get a handle on this.

I would really like to establish some parameters, so when people try to understand the issue they have a clue. I'm going to say, from my experience, wildlife with a long lens, whether monopod or tripod. keep SR on. If there are other parameters where it should be off, I'd like to see them. At the very least, I'd hope to discourage the "no SR on a monopod or tripod" thing from being tossed out there as a general rule, without defining parameters. It's left to folks like myself to sort out the damage when it when it doesn't work out.

---

Last edited by normhead; 12-14-2016 at 08:06 AM.

[UserAccessDenied]

Let's not get excited here, but yes I'd really like to see what you're talking about... who knows, maybe it's affecting my photos but I'm just not seeing it. IN any case, this has been repeated often enough, if one of the proponents would take the time to actually show us it might help. I have actually had to talk to others about this, in wildlife threads, because they were suffering from motion blur, and they didn't understand that SR is needed even on a tripod, if the tripod isn't locked. SO, I have in other threads had to correct those who listened to this advice.... because they were not getting as good results as they could have.

I know what not using SR causes, and I've seen the results, I'm completely in the dark as to what problems it causes.

I know in many of my situations it's dead wrong, but maybe in others situations SR is an issue. I'd like to sort it out with some images. Many times in the past, I've had situations like this were it turned out, the problem was not what the person thought it was. I've also had times when, when I do what they do, I get the same issue, but realized, I just don't do what they do.

I'm just trying to get a handle on this.

I would really like to establish some parameters, so when people try to understand the issue they have a clue. I'm going to say, from my experience, wildlife with a long lens, whether monopod or tripod. keep SR on. If there are other parameters where it should be off, I'd like to see them. At the very least, I'd hope to discourage the "no SR on a monopod or tripod" thing from being tossed out there as a general rule, without defining parameters. It's left to folks like myself to sort out the damage when it when it doesn't work out.

I totally agree that there should never be a general statement like that accepted without defining parameters.
Perhaps there's something else going on that I'm attributing the issue to SR when instead I should be focusing on another aspect of my photography.

I have just noticed turning off SR was a quick fix in the field when I noticed issues.

I have a few things to setup and test so I'll add this to the list.
It's completely dark by the time I get home from work, so I might do this experiment on Saturday.
I can likely make it work inside my house, but lighting is bad and I'd rather replicate something practical that would happen in the field.

I've learned so much from this forum in the last 2 years.
I almost hope I'm proved wrong, failure is the best way to learn. And if it helps someone else down the road, that's cool too!

Look for a post this weekend.
I'll likely start a new thread on it since the SR issue doesn't really apply to 'Thoughts on ISO'.

-Logan

[normhead]

I'm sure you have a valid point, (to many have said this for it to be totally wrong) I just can't determine from what's posted, what it is...

[BigMackCam]

I'm sure you have a valid point, I just can't determine from what's posted, what it is...

Norm - not wanting to confuse the issue, but this may be related:

For telephoto lenses, I tend to leave SR on unless my shutter speed is in excess of the notional 1 / (focal length x crop factor) safe limit, and I've had no problems that I recall.

However, I've found that when using certain wider angle lenses on my K-3, I sometimes get what I believe to be a "shutter shock" issue around the 1/100s mark (not always 1/100s - but around there) when shooting hand-held, and the effect is exacerbated by SR. Switching SR off reduces the problem to a level where it's barely noticeable. As a result, if I'm shooting anything wider than 50mm (not scientifically chosen - it's just a focal length I picked), and my shutter speed is likely to be in the 1/100 - 1/200s region, I try to remember to switch off SR. For slower shots - say, 1/25s, I get better results with SR enabled.

See the below test shots which demonstrate the effect (these tests were repeatable with the same results). Both were taken with SR enabled, but the right hand shot is at a much faster shutter speed. Unfortunately I can't find the test shots I did with SR disabled, but you'll have to take me on trust for now

[UserAccessDenied]

Norm - not wanting to confuse the issue, but this may be related:

For telephoto lenses, I tend to leave SR on unless my shutter speed is in excess of the notional 1 / (focal length x crop factor) safe limit, and I've had no problems that I recall.

However, I've found that when using certain wider angle lenses on my K-3, I sometimes get what I believe to be a "shutter shock" issue around the 1/100s mark (not always 1/100s - but around there) when shooting hand-held, and the effect is exacerbated by SR. Switching SR off reduces the problem to a level where it's barely noticeable. As a result, if I'm shooting anything wider than 50mm (not scientifically chosen - it's just a focal length I picked), and my shutter speed is likely to be in the 1/100 - 1/200s region, I try to remember to switch off SR. For slower shots - say, 1/25s, I get better results with SR enabled.

See the below test shots which demonstrate the effect (these tests were repeatable with the same results). Both were taken with SR enabled, but the right hand shot is at a much faster shutter speed. Unfortunately I can't find the test shots I did with SR disabled, but you'll have to take me on trust for now

Were you able to replicate this with other lenses? Or is it just with the Sigma 18-300?

The "shutter shock" you mention sounds similar to what I get, but with the DA*300. I can't pinpoint a shutter speed like you do, but it does seem to happen even at 1/1250. At this speed I shouldn't need SR anyways, but when it is on I find motion blur on images. Your first reaction might be out of focus, but I'm fairly confident that's not the problem here.

I just picked up a DFA100 so I'll also try to replicate my results with that lens.

Maybe it's just a factor past a particular FL?

I don't want to speculate too much, I want to test this to be sure.

[BigMackCam]

Were you able to replicate this with other lenses? Or is it just with the Sigma 18-300?

Unfortunately, Logan, I haven't tagged the images that were affected, and in any case it's probable they're long gone - I only have these brief tests left, without going through my catalog one by one. As I recall, though, I noted the same effect on my Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 at a wide-ish setting, and I seem to remember I saw it to a lesser extent with the DA35 f/2.4 (but I can't be certain).

At least one of our other members had what appeared to be the same issue with the K-1 + DFA28-105 (in fact, it was while trying to help diagnose that issue that I discovered I could recreate it with my K-3 ), and Ole (Adam's partner) noted the same effect on her K-1 and 28-105. In all these cases, though, we were shooting at relatively wide angles. But it could still be related to the issue you're seeing...

Anyway, back on to your original topic (though I'll look for your post-testing thread re the above)

[wildman]

Thoughts on ISO

I don't think about it much -
Set the the aperture and shutter appropriately for the scene, let the ISO float where it may, shoot RAW and set Ev for a proper ETTR exposure, pull the trigger and worry about the rest in Photoshop.

Taken exactly this way with a M 4/3 camera with it's 50 buck kit lens at IS0 8000. See EXIF for details.

[photoptimist]

I would really like to establish some parameters, so when people try to understand the issue they have a clue. I'm going to say, from my experience, wildlife with a long lens, whether monopod or tripod. keep SR on. If there are other parameters where it should be off, I'd like to see them. At the very least, I'd hope to discourage the "no SR on a monopod or tripod" thing from being tossed out there as a general rule, without defining parameters. It's left to folks like myself to sort out the damage when it when it doesn't work out.

This is one of those complicated situations that depends on the specific camera, specific lens, specific tripod, and even the specific mounting to the tripod.

The potential "bad" interactions between SR and tripod/monopods arise if the mechanical natural frequency of the camera-lens assembly on the *pod resonates with the SR system's electronic control loop frequency such that SR movements of the sensor induce more mechanical vibrations of the camera that then feedback into more movements of the SR system.

And it's not even a simple rule -- a better stiffer *pod might actually have worse resonance with the SR control loop, adding an L-plate might help or hurt, changing to a longer lens might help or hurt. All of these changes will change the natural frequency of the system but whether that new frequency is closer or further from resonance is hard to know.

I have no doubt that both UserAccessDenied and normhead are right about the effects of SR on their specific equipment setups.

Unfortunately, this is one of those situations in which each photographer needs to do their own testing.

[UserAccessDenied]

I don't think about it much -
Set the the aperture and shutter appropriately for the scene, let the ISO float where it may, shoot RAW and set Ev for ETTR exposure, pull the trigger and worry about the rest in Photoshop.

Taken exactly this way with a M 4/3 camera with it's 50 buck kit lens at IS0 8000. See EXIF for details.

wow, 8000 ISO?

Yeah I'm starting to realize this is how I should be shooting. Set my aperture and shutter speed - determine the degree of motion and depth of field desired. Let the camera handle ISO.

I have often caught myself in the past worrying about keeping ISO under a threshold. I will still try to keep it manageable, but no longer worried if it's ISO 400 or 800.



I guess it bring up a whole new discussion - maybe I need to invest in more software for handling noise.
Currently I just have the photographer's subscription, or whatever Adobe calls it. LR and PS in the creative cloud.
It works for most of what I need it for.

Wouldn't mind a dedicated program for noise and something else for photo stacking though. Astro and Macro come to mind. Sure there are ways in PS to do it, just haven't looked into it much yet.

[BigMackCam]

Yeah I'm starting to realize this is how I should be shooting. Set my aperture and shutter speed - determine the degree of motion and depth of field desired. Let the camera handle ISO.

That's generally how I shoot too. I'm not ashamed to say that my K-3 spends a lot of it's time in TAv mode On my Sony cameras, I use M mode but with Auto ISO set, which is exactly the same thing.

Everybody has an upper limit they deem acceptable, but I'd rather get a shot than none at all and deal with the consequences in post. That said, when the camera is forced into high ISO territory, I try to keep the shutter speed as low as possible and/or consider a wider aperture if possible... no sense shooting at unnecessarily high ISOs if it can be avoided

At ISO 800, you're not even scratching the surface of worrying noise with your K-3II, IMHO. You can shoot up to ISO 1600 with no worries, ISO 3200 with some noise but plenty of detail, and ISO 6400 onwards if you're prepared to do some gentle noise reduction in return for a bit of fine detail...

For noise reduction, I'd heartily recommend trying Google Nik Dfine 2, and learning how to use it properly (most people accept the default settings, which is not the way to do it). The 1:1 pixel-peeper images don't look as smooth as those from Lightroom, but once resized to a 1:2 view or below, they can look fantastic. You just need to be gentle with it

[wildman]

I need to invest in more software for handling noise.

I have 5 noise reduction programs. I use Imagenomic Noiseware the most. Allows precise control of how and where noise reduction is applied.

Another thought - its very difficult to predict how noise is going to show up on any given high ISO shot so go out and take a bunch of test shot at different ISOs and it will become obvious what your gear is doing and what it's limits are.

Here an ISO 2500 shot with the same camera but with the 560mm APO fluorite triplet.

[UserAccessDenied]

I have 5 noise reduction programs. I use Imagenomic Noiseware the most. Allows precise control of how and where noise reduction is applied.

Another thought - its very difficult to predict how noise is going to show up on any given high ISO shot so go out and take a bunch of test shot at different ISOs and it will become obvious what your gear is doing and what it's limits are.

Here an ISO 2500 shot with the same camera but with the 560mm APO fluorite triplet.

That's kind of how this all started.
I took a few shots at ISO 100 and then realized they were no better than the shots at ISO 800.
I'm sure there's a threshold where the difference is noticeable with lack of lighting... It seems that might be at the 3200 mark for the K-3

I'll have to check out the noise reduction program you mentioned.
Thanks!