Mike Cooley of Drive-By Truckers. 1/160 and f/2.8 at ISO 6400 with the Nikon D700. I've printed this image 20"x30" and you know what? It looks fantastic.
These days, just about every digital camera better than your iPhone has a user-selectable ISO range. While choice may be paralyzing, there’s always the concern of image quality as well.
Since live music at indoor venues is often very dimly lit (by relative photography standards), I often get asked about what ISO I shoot at for live music photograp15hy, or what camera sensitivity I recommend for live music in general.
Here’s my answer on what the best ISO sensitivity to use is for low light photography shot in any kind of photojournalism capacity.
For low light, high ISO work, there’s really no such thing as “optimal” image quality. When there are constraints on lighting, time and position, it can feel as though almost every aspect of photography is one of compromise. Image quality is no exception – especially when you’re shooting at the opposite end of the ISO range from a camera’s “best” performance.
Given the aforementioned technical constraints of live music photography, proper exposure for shows often comes down to a simple choice: Blur or noise?
This is essentially a consideration between using a lower ISO and compensating with a slower shutter speed, or using a higher ISO and a correspondingly higher shutter speed, albiet with the consequence of increased digital noise (and other drops in image quality associated with high ISO).
All things being equal, my personal take on this dichotomy is that I’ll take noise over blur any day of the week. If high levels of noise is the worst thing someone can say about your images, then it means you did everything else right.
Personally, I prefer to shoot between ISO 1600 and 3200 whenever possible with my Nikon D3 and Nikon D700. The reason for this one-stop range is that it offers very high quality in terms of acuity, color fidelity and lower noise levels while still offering a good degree of “speed.” For the venues and types of lighting I shoot, this range of sensitivities generally works perfectly with my f/2.8 lenses.
That said, I also shoot above ISO 3200 whenever I need the speed for my work.
My very first “big break” image of Radiohead printed double-page in SPIN was shot at ISO 6400 with the Nikon D3. There’s no concern of noise in print, even at a stop above my “sweet spot” range for that camera.
I’ve printed shots from the Nikon D3 and Nikon D7000 even larger, up to 20″ x 30″, and they look awesome.
Ultimately, the best ISO to use is the one that properly exposes your subject. Though it’s beneficial to have a preferred, “go-to” range of ISOs that one uses under optimal conditions, we all know that low light photography is so often anything but optimal.
The main takeaway of this post is that there’s no perfect or best high ISO setting.
If anything, I recommend shooting with and testing your camera at various settings and getting a feel for the quality that each setting will render. This will allow you to make the most informed choice based on the image quality required for the show, client and/or assignment.
Forget about a concern for noise, shadow detail or contrast – the best high ISO for you to use is the one that gets the job done. For almost all real world applications where you actually need high ISO performance, use whatever setting it takes.
If this article or any other content on www.ishootshows.com was helpful to you, please consider supporting this site and grabbing your next photo gear purchase through one of my affiliate links:
Simply clicking through any product links on this site helps me bring you free content like the photography tips and gear reviews regularly posted on www.ishootshows.com, and naturally it doesn’t cost you a cent more. If you do grab some gear, drop me a line! I’d love to hear about what you picked up.
If you want to donate directly to help support and host www.ishootshows.com (and if there’s any leftover, keep me stocked in tea), you can contribute money to www.ishootshows.com via PayPal.
Questions or comments? Leave a comment below, and let me know what you thought of this post.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 15th, 2012 at 12:00 am and is filed under Music Photography and tagged with camera settings, concert photography, high iso. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Welcome to ishootshows.com, your source for music photography featuring daily concert coverage, portrait features, and photo advice from professional music photographer Todd Owyoung.
Support this site by purchasing your photo equipment through my affiliate links to B&H Photo Video or Amazon.com
Learn more about how you can support the features of ishootshows.com.
Photographing single concerts on a tour are hard enough. Add in to the mix unpredictable weather, mu…
I have some exciting news. I’m very pleased to announce that the band Slayer are licensing an …
This weekend, my brother Chris Owyoung and I will be shooting something a little exciting: a concert…
Photographing single concerts on a tour are hard enough. Add in to the mix unpredictable weather, mu…
I have some exciting news. I’m very pleased to announce that the band Slayer are licensing an …
With the Fuji X-Pro1 I am shooting 1,000 ISO in the middle of the day. The pictures here were shot at daytime, with a polarizer at 640 ISO http://johnsmith-johnsimages.blogspot.ca/2012/05/bone-yard.html . I could NOT have conceived doing that a year ago!
Hey John, thanks for the comment. Yes, the new Fuji X-Pro1 does extremely well even at higher sensitivities, like most all current DSLRs.
Thanks Todd!
A very informative post. I get the fact that “usable” is a totally nebulous term.
Last week I shot Brian Head Welch and P.O.D. in a cave. With my D7000 ISO3200, f2.8 1/160… I still was underexposed by at least 2 stops.and as these are mosh bands I was super lucky to get any stop action at all. I gained about 1/2 stop going to ISO4500 still not enough stop action.. and even the raw images look like total crap from the noise.
Does the amount of noise differ from a FF body to a DX body? maybe it’s a sensor thing.
But even if I would’ve gotten good exposure I’m not sure I would’ve showed them due to the amount of noise. Maybe next time I shoot a show there I should try renting a D3s.
Thanks again for all you share!! I continue to learn so much from you.
I believe you’ve said something along the lines of “If you’re afraid of some noise in your concert photos, you shouldn’t be shooting concerts” before. Maybe I made that up, but I totally agree. However, when you end up with excessive noise, do you rely on Lightroom’s Noise Reduction sliders under “Details” or the Remove Chromatic Aberration option under “Lens Corrections”? And how much would you deem acceptable?
Love the post. Quick question- do you have any of your camera’s built-in noise reduction features turned on?
Thanks!
Hey Todd,
I’m with you.
High ISO in low light photography is still the best way. For me, no matter with noise, because music photography without noise is a flat image and stage photogrpahy isn’t commercial photography with smooth image quality.
May photographers better do art for himself, people, readers, and his subscribers, it’s not just for himself. In my private observation, most people are more love with a bright photos.
Okay, if you guys read this comment, don’t blame me, I’m not saying low ISO in music photography is bad. Just share and it back to your own taste. Cheers.
Check out the EXIF data on Kathryn Yu’s concert photography on flickr for some real world examples: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kathryn/collections/72157606327863281/
It looks like ISO 5000 is about as far as she’ll push her 5DmkII. The insight a little EXIF data gives you is fascinating.
I get the feeling that as sensors have got better at dealing with high iso|s the acceptance of grain in concert photos has gone down. I was looking at a photobook by Mick Rock with shots containing golf ball sized grain from the 70s that just wouldn not get accepted by publishers nowadays never mind get in a book.
My D300 starts producing noticeable noise at 1600, which is where I need for most correct concert exposures. Seeing as I cannot afford a D3 or D700 that would allow me 3200 to 6400, how about a post about noise reduction Todd?
Hi,
interesting discussion. I think, apart from the question how grainy the pictures get, we should talk about the color depth which decreases every time you push the ISOs. Grain seems not a big problem to me, especially since the Nikons produce a very nice grain. But according to the DxOMark tests for the Nikon D3 (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Nikon/D3) the color depth (which they call color sensitivity) is 19.1 bits at ISO1600 and decreases to 15.9 bits at ISO6400. That means, that at ISO1600 the image can store 561.917 colors while at ISO6400 it only stores 61.147 different colors. That’s why images look flat at ISO6400 and have a (to my opinion) more cellphone-lile look. That’s why i always try to keep the ISO as low as possible. Sure, you can always fresh up the images afterwards while processing the RAWs or convert them to b/w but i prefer having the most information in my pictures than wasting image quality – which certainly has its limits when the action on stage is fast and lights are low.
Greets
Peter
Hello Todd. I just finished my first music shoot with a D800. It was a jazz venue with very poor lighting. I ended up having to shoot ISO12800 at 1/180 f2.8 out of necessity. The image quality is amazing! It easily exceeds the quality I was getting in my film days shooting T-Max 3200 at ISO1600.
Hello
Very positive post – educational
Comments are also highly relevant…
Let the lens be with you always