[enyaw]

Hi are the images from a K50 at 3200 ISO acceptable? I know 1600 is ok, but I've read you can push the iso up to 3200. Does daytime differ from nighttime while using 3200. I intend to do some birding and will need fast shutter speeds with a slow lens f5.6.

thanks,

ie auto iso 100-3200, I previously had it at 1-1600. Just curious, before I actually go out and try it

[Tonytee]

Hi are the images from a K50 at 3200 ISO acceptable? I know 1600 is ok, but I've read you can push the iso up to 3200. Does daytime differ from nighttime while using 3200. I intend to do some birding and will need fast shutter speeds with a slow lens f5.6.

thanks,

ie auto iso 100-3200, I previously had it at 1-1600. Just curious, before I actually go out and try it

I have not had very good results at the higher ISO ranges. Photos turn out dark and very grainy. Hope this helps.

TT

[photolady95]

I've had good results up to ISO1250 over that and they're noisy.
I don't use auto ISO though because my camera is set up for manual shooting.

[KDD]

Depend on lenses. Only fast lens like 50mm f1.4 or 1.8. 35mm f2.4 or others.

[enyaw]

ok, I'll stick to 1,600 then. Thanks

I guess only the higher end models can handle 3200 like K3 Ks2 and up

[THoog]

I guess only the higher end models can handle 3200 like K3 Ks2 and up

It's more complicated than that. The higher-res bodies tend to have more noise at ISO 3200, but it tends to be luminance noise instead of false color, so it's not hard to clean up in post without losing detail. However, it does require that extra step in post. When the K-3 first came out, a lot of folks thought it was worse than the K-5 in low light because they had to change their workflow.

While I never let my 12MP cameras (K-x,K-r) go over 1600, I'm generally comfortable letting the 16MP cameras (K-5,K-01,K-30) go to 3200 - it depends on what I'm shooting and what I'm planning on doing with the shots. If it's going to get downsampled for the web, 3200 is fine.

[Larrymc]

ok, I'll stick to 1,600 then. Thanks

I guess only the higher end models can handle 3200 like K3 Ks2 and up

As a general rule the K3 doesn't handle ISO 3200 really well either especially for birding. Better get a fast prime for birding instead of wasting your time at higher ISO setting.

[C_Jones]

When I shoot birds in flight with my K-3II/Sigma 150-500 setup I use 800-1250 shutter speed depending on expected quickness of the bird, an F stop of approximately F8 or more depending on light, and I am in TAV mode so the ISO is auto. All I do is point my camera in the general area of where the bird route may be expected to fly and look at how my settings affect my ISO. and adjust to accommodate the lowest possible. If it is overcast or getting late in the day it is not your fault if the ISO becomes higher, and on well lit days the light is an advantage to keep the ISO down and have flexibility in adjusting the F stop and shutter speed. For birds on tree limbs for example, I use something like F9 or more, 320 shutter speed to accommodate minor movement, and am in TAV mode unless I find that I have time to adjust settings in Manual mode which sometimes works out very well.

My ISO range is set to 200-1600, but I try to stay 800 or below if possible.

[ramseybuckeye]

Generally bird shots won't do as well with high ISO because there is a lot of detail in them, I usually have to crop a lot which makes it worse, but you can get some some shots:

This Prothonotary Warbler was shot at very close range at ISO 1600, F4, 1/320 on K-30 and DA*300, detail is not great but OK.


Here is a Canada Warbler at ISO 3200, F4, i/400, with much less detail


At F1250 this Tennessee Warbler has a lot of detail:


An image like this is generally acceptable at ISO 3200 because of the content, birds are much harder to get:

[AquaDome]

I recall the K-50 looking better at high-ISOs than the K-3. I used to use the K-50 with A50/1.4 for through-the-windshield photos at night (with my brother driving). Here is an example from the K-50 at 16000.

Yes, 16000, not 1600.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

If you're strictly doing out of camera jpegs, then yeah. They start sucking at ISO 800 & get fairly bad at ISO 3200.

If you post process the RAW files, you can easily shoot up to ISO 12800 & get decent images out of them through your favorite raw editor. Images look really great up to ISO 3200, good to ISO 6400, & decent to ISO 12800. It all depends on nailing the proper exposure & on your tolerance of grain.

[mgoblue]

Dynamic range gets pretty cramped, in addition to the noise. Outside the dynamic range is a bigger problem to me at 3200 since as others have mentioned the noise in bright light is less noticeable. The ability to mask noise is pretty subject dependent though. Once highlights are clipped, ugh, and exposing to the left brings up even more noise in the shadows in post. Plus everything, especially color starts to look flat and lacking in tonal range. Fine for some scenes, but the DR issue is real.

[enyaw]

I'm overwhelmed by the volume and detail of responses. Thank you. I'm going to try a few at that iso on bright clear days. I have lightroom 6 and I shoot raw. If I find it too grainy or lacking in details I'll tone it back to 1600. I'm going to stick to dove sized birds because of my lens at the moment. 300mm kind of short. Unless I can get close

[C_Jones]

This is an example of a bird in flight shot with my K-3II/Sigma 150-500 on a nice day. If you look at the EXIF data you will see the settings I used. I was able to keep the ISO at 200. It is an unedited JPEG file.

[BigMackCam]

Hi are the images from a K50 at 3200 ISO acceptable? I know 1600 is ok, but I've read you can push the iso up to 3200. Does daytime differ from nighttime while using 3200. I intend to do some birding and will need fast shutter speeds with a slow lens f5.6.

thanks,

ie auto iso 100-3200, I previously had it at 1-1600. Just curious, before I actually go out and try it

You've had some great answers already, but I'll add one more...

I regularly shot my K-5 (and still do, sometimes) at ISO 3200, 6400 or even higher. In reasonably good lighting (typically when it's the lens aperture setting that demands using a higher ISO), you can expect good results at ISO 3200 and even higher. In darker situations, you'll notice the noise a lot more.

Firstly, try not to crop your photos. The more you crop, the more prominent the noise will seem for the same viewing size - so, try to get your subject framed accurately to begin with, and avoid cropping as much as possible.

Secondly, shoot RAW, and invest in good post-processing software if you don't have it already. I wrote an article last year on Lightroom processing for Pentax Q images, where I took a photo shot at ISO 3200 with my original-version Pentax Q and cleaned it up in Lightroom. The end result might surprise you. If this is achievable with the Q's tiny sensor, there's no reason why you can't get considerably better results with the K-50 at the same ISO