Whats Your Favourite ISO Setting with the M8?

[jky]

320 mostly, but I don't hesitate to shoot up to 1250 if needed. 320 is treated like 400 film so I'm just much more used to adjusting the settings when in manual @ this particular iso. Screws me up a bit when set to another speed & I become a bit of a Homer Simpson when reviewing images 😉 Doh!

 

[kittyphoto]

I like 320 it is the sweet spot between noise and sharpness.
Sharpness on 640 is a bit too soft for my taste.
I also like 1250 noise is less than 1600 iso film.
I always set 320 for day and 1250 for night.
Tend to skip 640.

 

[ruslan]

Up to 2500 in a day time or night, regular shoot 160 iso with flash studio lighting.

 

[figfoto]

160 daylight 640 for indoors. after software upgrade noticed much improved results with 640.

 

[Photon42]

If I have time to think about ISO, I chose the the lowest possible. Otherwise, I take whatever is set 😀 Seriously, if I think about it, I have the M8 on either 160 or AUTO-ISO - the latter pretty much replaced any high ISO number.

Actually, I don't find that noise is particularly film-like. If this is what I'm after, I use post processing or film ...

 

[tmfabian]

I use the m8 at 1250 and 2500 most of the time for b+w work and 640 and 1250 for color stuff.

 

[gDallasK]

I dislike noise in my colour landscape work so rarely stray above 320.

 

[presspass]

640 gives me enough speed to work indoors without flash and is slow enough to use outside without fiddling with ISO setting. Re Gabriel M.A.'s comment about 2500 being better in JPEG than RAW - thanks for the suggestion; I will try this. Any special Photoshop processing?

 

[myM8yogi]

Tricky question. Gross generalisation:
160 for landscapes, slow exposures on a tripod, or any f/2 work in daylight. 360 for f/8 zone focus street shooting. 640 or 1250 for B+W portraits indoors. 2500 for a laugh - I need to work on my PP more if I am ever going to consider this setting usable.

I have to select one... so I'll go for ISO 360 as it's virtually indistinguishable from 160, giving arguably the best relative noise performance for the shutter speed in any given light.

 

[jvan01]

160 outdoors

160 indoors

 

[Symeon]

iso on M8

iso on M8

well, the 640 is actually 800 and the 320 is 400, I think. In color both iso look fine but in BW the 640 looks better, definitely. Even the 1250 can look ok in BW depending on the light conditions (especially in daylight). Being used to 400 iso TriX or HP5 in the old days I have no complaints.
regards,
Simon

 

[yanidel]

Whatever allows me not to go below 1/125th. I do mostly street photography so I use Auto Iso up to 640. As I like to shoot wide open, most of my day pictures are at 160 which I find wonderful with the M8.
I don't like the "1250" and find the 1600 R-D1 grain way better, similar to the 640 M8 grain.
2500 is unusable IMO unless you have to, that is below 1/8th.

 

[helen.HH]

160 outdoors

160 indoors

I DO AGREE .....🙂 😎

 

[ruslan]

I found that I'm using more and more jpeg 1250iso in B&W, instead of RAW, even in daylight.

 

[dan denmark]

this has been one of the more interesting info threads on this forum of late. i am curious if there is a parralel to ISO settings on the RD1S? or perhaps a thread which addresses this? i am not on RFF often enough to read all the new threads so i don't know if this has alrady been covered...(although i did enjoy the "reading RFF over breakfast" syndrome thread, very amusing and true of many of us...i read RFF over my first coffee sometimes while i am waiting for the dog to wake up for his walk).

-dd

 

[cmdrfire]

For most street B&W I've been using 320, and adding a bit more grain in post if I have to (never used to like grainy pictures 'til I started shooting with the M8...). I took some shots at 160 the other day and found I didn't like it as much as I did 320, things seemed too "smooth" if that makes sense.

 

[johnastovall]

640 nice film like look. It also works well for Alien Skin Exposure B&W post processing.

 

[johannielscom]

I've just come from the D300 in digital, and that camera was a stellar performer at speeds up to 1600 ISO.

I'm still clinging to the looks of that clean sensor, so I voted 160.

Nice poll though! Gets you thinking on a lot of issues and I definitely will try some other ISOs after reading all your replies.

You have to love RFF for all the possibilities offered to ones own photography when conversing with fellow shooters who have other opinions and beliefs.

Thanks to the OP and all respondents!

 

[footnoteblog]

Whatever works?

If Capa took the soldier photo with a Phase One, and post-processed it with HDR and Alien Skin from the future, would the image be any better?

pontificating on minutae == missing the point

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

320 for B/W 160 color