# AutoISO messed up.... AGAIN? arrrrrrr it's just not that difficult



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 16, 2012)

Wow, I can't believe something so simple as AutoISO is STILL not usable! Good grief!

1. In Auto ISO M mode there is no EC allowed again! 

2. So then you are like well they added min. shutter speed to Auto ISO now so at least we might be able to often get away with using Av mode instead. BUT, they make the maximum allowed min speed only 1/250th??? They limit it from 1 second to 1/250th?! What!? What does 1/250th do you for action?? And if you are using 1 second long exposures and stuff you surely have enough time to adjust the ISO as needed manually anyway.
Wow. It is so beyond absurd. Why on earth do they limit it? It makes no sense.

And of course will they fix it in firmware? Not unless by new firmware you mean $4500 for the 5D4. (and even then, after almost 20 years dare we hope they finally hit upon a truly usable AutoISO? I'm not sure.)

I mean it would be soooooo easy to fix in firmware and I wouldn't make a big deal, but we all know it's like pulling teeth to get them to fix anything like that in firmware.

At least they did finally decide to listen and outline the histogram so you can see it in bright light but just as I was happy about that and the the AutoISO Av shutter limits then I see min shutter speed can be set from 1 second to 1/250th. arrrrrrrrr I mean they focus the limit on the very speeds where AutoISO is LEAST useful!


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Wow, I can't believe something so simple as AutoISO is STILL not usable! Good grief!
> 
> 1. In Auto ISO M mode there is no EC allowed again!
> 
> ...



Auto ISO is best used in M mode when all the issues that you mention just disappear. This feature was also available on the 1D4 so it is nothing new.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Auto ISO is best used in M mode when all the issues that you mention just disappear. This feature was also available on the 1D4 so it is nothing new.



1. It's new in M mode in that it was locked out on the 5D2 and older stuff, years worth of stuff.
2. you missed my point #1 where they still don't allow EC to work in M mode AutoISO.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Auto ISO is best used in M mode when all the issues that you mention just disappear. This feature was also available on the 1D4 so it is nothing new.
> ...



I shoot in RAW so EC is not a big deal

It isn't new in M mode because it is in the 7D and 1D4

You were claiming that AutoISO was messed up in the 5D3 - which it clearly isnt - and you call Canon stupid which they clearly are not.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 16, 2012)

I can certainly see why a person might need some exposure correction, it seems like a unnecessary omission to me. I certainly plan to use the manual/ auto iso setting, and if I'd like to expose to the right, or correct a backlit situation, EC would be very useful.

Does the D1 X have it?


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I can certainly see why a person might need some exposure correction, it seems like a unnecessary omission to me. I certainly plan to use the manual/ auto iso setting, and if I'd like to expose to the right, or correct a backlit situation, EC would be very useful.
> 
> Does the D1 X have it?



I would guess not - EC in M mode is a bit of a contradiction. However FEC works ....


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I can certainly see why a person might need some exposure correction, it seems like a unnecessary omission to me. I certainly plan to use the manual/ auto iso setting, and if I'd like to expose to the right, or correct a backlit situation, EC would be very useful.
> ...



not if in M mode the EC gets applied to the iso so when Auto ISO is enabled then
EC is also enabled and acts on ISO only if auto ISO is disabled the EC is disabled as normal
it would be a pretty powerfull function IMO
helps keep control over Exposure and keeps the lowest iso but allowing flexability in changing light
Auto anything only ever works where scene metering is quite balanced


----------



## qwerty (Mar 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I can certainly see why a person might need some exposure correction, it seems like a unnecessary omission to me. I certainly plan to use the manual/ auto iso setting, and if I'd like to expose to the right, or correct a backlit situation, EC would be very useful.
> ...



There is no contradiction if one is using auto-ISO. From my reading of the guidebook (not using the word manual to avoid confusion), if you are in M mode and using auto-ISO, the camera will force you to use what it thinks is the correct exposure (AE-Lock notwithstanding).

If you had the option to set exposure on the fly, M-mode + auto-ISO would probably replace Av as my default setting, particularly in changing light conditions.

Of course, the best solution for a pure manual mode would be to have 3 dials, each of which could be independently set to one of {aperture/shutter speed/iso/exposure}; with the 4th determined by the camera. 

A user-programmable (but not necessarily on-camera-programmable) custom exposure mode would be feasible too, where one could specify (i.e. write a program that the camera would run) how to set the four parameters above based on some set of user settings and the scene illumination at various points.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

qwerty said:


> If you had the option to set exposure on the fly, M-mode + auto-ISO would probably replace Av as my default setting, particularly in changing light conditions.



Not sure what you are getting at here?

As you are in M mode then iso, aperture and shutter speed are adjustable on the fly


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



It is because the limits they put, for NO REASON, in AutoISO Av mode are not good AND because no EC in M mode and now you are just making excuses by saying that shooting in RAW means that proper exposure now doesn't matter? Weren't you all using the excuse that those wanting better DR are just fools who don't know how to use proper exposure? interesting....


----------



## qwerty (Mar 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> qwerty said:
> 
> 
> > If you had the option to set exposure on the fly, M-mode + auto-ISO would probably replace Av as my default setting, particularly in changing light conditions.
> ...




Not if you are using auto-ISO (the topic of this thread); per the manual, only two of those parameters are adjustable if you are using auto-ISO. That is part of why people are complaining. If you could use auto-ISO in M mode *and *adjust exposure, it would suit my shooting style much better. For me, its easier to think in terms of specifying {aperture, shutter speed, and exposure}, and let the computer (camera) figure out what ISO is needed to give me what I want.

As it is, if you are using auto-ISO, and you want to shoot in M-mode using the exposure that *you *decide is correct (instead of the camera), you could either a) find something in the scene to use AE Lock on, then recompose (which is a pain, and not suitable for quick shooting), or b) change out of auto-ISO mode, which defeats the purpose of auto-ISO mode.

As I understand it from the manual, a custom setting C1 set to default in M-mode @ f/2, 1/200 second (aperture and shutter speed adjusted in between shots as needed), and using auto-ISO, would work for about 85% of the pictures I take indoors without flash. If I could add in exposure compensation, that would go up to about 95-100% of the no-flash indoor shots I take.

Similarly, C2 set to default in M-mode @ f/2.8, 1/2000 second (again, these would be adjusted based on conditions, I am just giving typical values) and using auto-ISO would work for about 60% of the sports shooting I do outdoors (a lower percentage because backlighting is more common outdoors). If I could add exposure compensation, that would be 95-100% again.

For landscapes and such, I don't care to use auto-ISO, because I can easily spare a few seconds to change ISO every shot, if needed. For other things, a slightly more intelligent auto-ISO would be amazing.


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 16, 2012)

To those wondering why you'd want EC in M mode with Auto ISO, here's an example: a grossly backlit object. The camera will just end up underexposing unless you switch to spot metering mode or use AE lock. 

AE lock is complicated by the fact that if the subject is too small compared to the rest of the scene, you won't even be able to use it to lock on to an appropriate exposure.

Whereas ±5 stops of EC & a generally good knowledge/intuition for EV values of different elements in the scene would have combined to make a much more useful AutoISO in M mode.

But then again, for me, Auto ISO in M mode is already going to be limited for me b/c I would've used it most with off-camera flashes, and if they put limitations on the ISO there... *sigh*. 

I've never used Auto ISO & it may just end up staying that way!

I agree that firmware fixes would be extremely welcome. Or open up your entire platform and let users do some programming for their own needs! Haha, definitely wishful thinking on that last one there...


----------



## YellowJersey (Mar 16, 2012)

Doesn't matter to me, as I always change ISO manually. The closest I get to auto is using AV and sometimes TV.


----------



## callaesthetics (Mar 16, 2012)

im not quite understanding this? i have the 7D and my camera does all of what you just mentioned the 5D3 can't do? is this true?


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

callaesthetics said:


> im not quite understanding this? i have the 7D and my camera does all of what you just mentioned the 5D3 can't do? is this true?



The 5DII has an auto iso system the same as the 7D with a few extras.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> To those wondering why you'd want EC in M mode with Auto ISO, here's an example: a grossly backlit object. The camera will just end up underexposing unless you switch to spot metering mode or use AE lock.



Correct - so if you are following a bird or a bike you have it in spot mode. I would expect this to be normal practise




sarangiman said:


> But then again, for me, Auto ISO in M mode is already going to be limited for me b/c I would've used it most with off-camera flashes, and if they put limitations on the ISO there... *sigh*.



Using flash and auto iso is not the way to go. Set all the parameters in M mode and let the flash produce the right amount of light.

AutoISO messed up.... AGAIN - NO!! it's just not that difficult once you understand it


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 16, 2012)

> _sarangiman said:_ To those wondering why you'd want EC in M mode with Auto ISO, here's an example: a grossly backlit object. The camera will just end up underexposing unless you switch to spot metering mode or use AE lock.
> 
> _briansquibb said:_ Correct - so if you are following a bird or a bike you have it in spot mode. I would expect this to be normal practise



Yes but under other shooting conditions, say a wedding, switching back & forth between spot & evaluative is much more of a pain than just using EC. That being said, in non-flash event shooting, I typically use Av anyway... so not a huge concern to me personally.



> Using flash and auto iso is not the way to go. Set all the parameters in M mode and let the flash produce the right amount of light.



I'm sorry, it was late & I wasn't thinking. You're absolutely right-- I always use M w/ off-camera flash specifically b/c I want to control the *ambient vs. flash ratio*. Auto ISO _takes that control away_ & so is absolutely useless in the scenario I brought up.

Thanks for pointing that out


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Yes but under other shooting conditions, say a wedding, switching back & forth between spot & evaluative is much more of a pain than just using EC. That being said, in non-flash event shooting, I typically use Av anyway... so not a huge concern to me personally.



It is worth practising changing the metering (by the WB button) whilst viewfinding. For not so fast action such as a wedding this is a simple and reasonably quick change to make inflight.

With the 1D4 I use M mode/auto iso about equal time to AV when not using flash (which is full manual). I use M/auto iso in order to keep the needed iso to the minimum by setting the slowest shutter speed and the maximum aperture - this keeps the IQ/DR to the maximum


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 16, 2012)

> I use M/auto iso in order to keep the needed iso to the minimum by setting the slowest shutter speed and the maximum aperture - this keeps the IQ/DR to the maximum



That's also great technique -- unfortunately not possible on the 5D2 b/c what the camera thinks are acceptable shutter speeds may or may not be acceptable at all. So hopefully that's totally fixed on the 5D3 now...


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > I use M/auto iso in order to keep the needed iso to the minimum by setting the slowest shutter speed and the maximum aperture - this keeps the IQ/DR to the maximum
> 
> 
> 
> That's also great technique -- unfortunately not possible on the 5D2 b/c what the camera thinks are acceptable shutter speeds may or may not be acceptable at all. So hopefully that's totally fixed on the 5D3 now...



The 5D2 has an auto iso limit of 400iso which is poor and one of the key factors of me going down the 7D/1D4 route


----------



## t.linn (Mar 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> You were claiming that AutoISO was messed up in the 5D3 - which it clearly isnt - and you call Canon stupid which they clearly are not.



The OP is correct. The lack of exposure compensation control in M+auto-ISO is no less limiting than trying to shoot in Av or Tv without EC. Perhaps the confusion lies in the term "manual + auto ISO". The bottom line is that if aperture and shutter speed are fixed but ISO is floating, then this parameter is set based on what the camera thinks the correct exposure should be. And just like in Av or Tv, the camera is often wrong. But unlike Av and Tv, in M+auto-ISO there is no way to compensate for the error.

This should be pretty obvious to a camera engineer if he/she actually uses cameras and is not just making theoretical choices. I hesitate to name call but the term "stupid" doesn't seem too far off the mark. Situations like this are particularly hard to accept from Canon since they are highly profitable with huge cash reserves and thus have the resources to get things like this right. It's not like their camera division isn't highly profitable. Perhaps they are crippled by bureaucracy in a way that smaller competitors like Pentax are not. Regardless, I am in complete agreement with the OP on this.


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 16, 2012)

Do you think that enough people directly complaining to Canon from even before the camera is in the hands of people will get them to provide a firmware fix?

Where does one even lodge such suggestions/complaints?

Also, in M mode, what dial would be used for EC?


----------



## bloodstupid (Mar 16, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Do you think that enough people directly complaining to Canon from even before the camera is in the hands of people will get them to provide a firmware fix?
> 
> Where does one even lodge such suggestions/complaints?
> 
> Also, in M mode, what dial would be used for EC?



It cant hurt to try, i allready filled out an online-contact-form asking them politely to consider including faster speeds. They did add autofocus for F8 in the 1Dx after user complaints didnt they?


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 16, 2012)

I gotta say, while not worthy of shrieking, it is pretty dumb. Ideally, if I were shooting the sports I shoot, I would want to set a shutter speed floor of 1/1000 or so and let Auto ISO choose an appropriate ISO. This is really quite a strange thing for Canon to do.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> I gotta say, while not worthy of shrieking, it is pretty dumb. Ideally, if I were shooting the sports I shoot, I would want to set a shutter speed floor of 1/1000 or so and let Auto ISO choose an appropriate ISO. This is really quite a strange thing for Canon to do.



I believe that this is the whole point of using auto iso in M mode which the 5DIII can do. I am doing karts tomorrow - I will set mode to M, av to f/4 and tv to 1/1000 with auto iso and it will choose the correct iso.


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I believe that this is the whole point of using auto iso in M mode which the 5DIII can do. I am doing karts tomorrow - I will set mode to M, av to f/4 and tv to 1/1000 with auto iso and it will choose the correct iso.


Actually, what I ideally want is for the camera to favor changing shutter speed in AV mode to changing ISO. I would like to tell the camera, "hey camera, set your floor shutter speed at 1/1000 and let Av move the shutter up to 1/8000. Only change ISO if you have to in order to maintain a minimum 1/1000. I would rather my shutter speed float. If I set the minimum shutter to 1/2000, then ISO may go up to 3200 when the action moves to the shade. But I would rather have 1/2000 or even 1/4000 when I can get it because horses move fast. I don't want to hard set the shutter at 1/1000.

I think this makes sense, right? This system won't do that, right?


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 16, 2012)

sorry guys, but What is EC means?........I found this info in 5D III manual


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 16, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I believe that this is the whole point of using auto iso in M mode which the 5DIII can do. I am doing karts tomorrow - I will set mode to M, av to f/4 and tv to 1/1000 with auto iso and it will choose the correct iso.
> ...



I dont do it that way - I am happy fixing the av and tv - effectively this approach sets the camera to set the minimum ISO. I would set the safety shift on to allow the camera to override M mode.

I believe it can be done in the series 1 by setting tv range and safety shift although I have never used this as you have to change a fn ( which I am liable not to change back )


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 17, 2012)

> But I would rather have 1/2000 or even 1/4000 when I can get it because horses move fast. I don't want to hard set the shutter at 1/1000.



What you speak of goes entirely against the principle of 'adjust everything else within limits, then select the minimum ISO that gives you an acceptable exposure (±EC, or exposure compensation, for the bloke above).

What you're asking for is to give high shutter speed a priority, allowing ISO to go higher than the camera could get by just setting a longer shutter speed (and therefore lower ISO). 

That just goes against the entire philosophy of Auto ISO. What you're asking for is essentially 'use highest ISO possible within my limits, float everything else'.

Seems like a pretty limited case scenario to me. Seems to me you could just do one of the following:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Shoot in Tv mode, where the camera will prefer wider apertures, then increasing ISO. You even have EC available.
[*]Shoot in M mode, select the aperture/shutter speed you prefer, camera will select lowest ISO necessary.
[/list]

What's wrong with either of those two options?

Also, I ask again, what would you guys propose be the method of changing EC in M mode using Auto ISO? I would, for example, say: hold M.fn function down & use wheel to adjust EC.

Also, this whole 'defaults to ISO 400' thing... think that's because that's about unity gain for the 5DIII (and 5DII)? So they decided if you're using flash, you're probably deprived of light, so going below 400 would be undesirable, & going above 400 doesn't help much anyway since some people hold that there's not much advantage to shooting above unity gain ISO anyway & you have a flash to help anyhow...

Is that sound reasoning? I myself am unsure...


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 17, 2012)

I think the issue of auto iso for flash is a non problem as the shooter needs to decide the amount of ambient needed, rather than the camera.

I was using iso 50 today to lose the ambient, worked a treat and got better IQ for it at the same time


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 17, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > But I would rather have 1/2000 or even 1/4000 when I can get it because horses move fast. I don't want to hard set the shutter at 1/1000.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I assure you, I run into this problem all of the time.

Tv and M mode would not work because you have to hard set your shutter speed. Assume you are shooting sports action where there is bright light at one end of the field and shadow at the other end; in fact, those are the conditions I will be shooting in tomorrow. Av works okay. You can set your aperture wide open and set your ISO to say 1600 to make sure you get the shot at the dark end of the field, but why would you want the 1600 ISO in the sunny part? BUT, if you don't put the ISO so high, when the action switches quickly to shadow, your shutter speed will crash and you'll get blurry shots.

If you go M and hard set your aperture wide open and shutter to some minimum, then your ISO will vary wildly and you could have gotten a better shot with lower ISO. The trouble is, the action moves quickly from light to shadow and there's no way to react quickly enough.

The trouble with Auto ISO in Av mode now is that the camera chooses changing ISO before changing shutter speed and I hate that. Shutter speed doesn't affect image quality much after it reaches a minimum threshold for getting the shot, but ISO does. 

If I could tell the camera to ONLY change ISO to keep the shutter speed from dipping below, say 1/1000, otherwise change shutter speed, that would solve my problem of constantly having to make small adjustments. As it stands now, I'm constantly making adjustments to minimize ISO and still get the shot.

That would be very powerful and be extremely helpful to sports togs who deal with rapidly changing lighting conditions.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 17, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> If I could tell the camera to ONLY change ISO to keep the shutter speed from dipping below, say 1/1000, otherwise change shutter speed, that would solve my problem of constantly having to make small adjustments. As it stands now, I'm constantly making adjustments to minimize ISO and still get the shot.
> 
> That would be very powerful and be extremely helpful to sports togs who deal with rapidly changing lighting conditions.



As I said - this can be done in series 1 bodies


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 17, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> As I said - this can be done in series 1 bodies


As far as I know, Squibby, safety shift only affects the primary variable in Av or Tv mode, right? If you set it to TV, your aperture will vary and that's the last thing I want. I want that lens wide open. If you set it to Av, all safety shift does it shift the aperture just in case. I've got my 1D4 right here. Maybe I'm missing something? I'd be thrilled if someone knew what custom function I pushed to make my dreams come true.


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 17, 2012)

> The trouble with Auto ISO in Av mode now is that the camera chooses changing ISO before changing shutter speed and I hate that.



Really? Doesn't it 1st select the minimum shutter speed (settable between 1/250 - 1sec), then change the ISO? Or are you complaining about the fact that you can't set that minimum shutter speed at 1/1000? If the latter, I agree; there should be no limits on the minimum shutter speed setting, as there's no cost to getting ridding of this limit (that I can think of).

If you could set the minimum shutter speed to 1/1000, then in very bright conditions, in Av mode, the camera would shoot at higher shutter speed to keep ISO down, correct? 

So your only complaint is that minimum shutter speed setting is limited between 1/250 - 1s. Am I understanding correctly now?

Man I wish these cameras were programmable...


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 17, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > As I said - this can be done in series 1 bodies
> ...



I cant remember the details - but from memory you set it in av mode with tv limits and then when the limits are hit safety shift jumps in and changes the iso. I dont think this is using auto iso obviously as this would be constantly changing.

I am taking pictures of karts today so there is an opportunity for me to try it out.


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 17, 2012)

I never found safety shift particularly good, maybe i did something wrong but I just ended up turning it off


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 17, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> I never found safety shift particularly good, maybe i did something wrong but I just ended up turning it off



I dont use it either as I dont have a need for it. However smirky is looking for a solution to meet his needs and this may be a way round it.

If anyoone else has used this approach (told to me by a pro when I got the 1D4) please feel free to chime in.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 17, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > As I said - this can be done in series 1 bodies
> ...



OK I got it working the way you wanted it.

Objective: Set set a minimum and maximum shutter speed. In Av mode if the shutter speed dropped below the mimimum then the ISO would be bumped up so that the minimum was reached again.

Method: 

- enable safety shift (iso speed) C.Fn 1 - 8
- set shutter speed range C.fn 1 - 12 ( set the minimum shutter speed )

In the field:

- set the Av value
- set the base iso value (can be L so then it acts as auto iso)
- set exp comp as needed (yes we get exp comp and auto iso this way)

I was photographing karts this morning so I set the minimum Tv to 1/500, Av at f/4 and iso100 which was about the critical point. ISO went up and down as expected, Tv went above 500 when the cloud lifted

So there you are - how to get auto iso with iso and Av limits set.


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 17, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> OK I got it working the way you wanted it.
> 
> Objective: Set set a minimum and maximum shutter speed. In Av mode if the shutter speed dropped below the mimimum then the ISO would be bumped up so that the minimum was reached again.
> 
> ...


Awesome. I have a polo match to shoot in a couple of hours. I'll let you know how it works. I just looked through the custom functions on the 5D3 and it doesn't exist there, though. Of course the lowly d7000 lets you set a minimum shutter speed in Av up to 1/4000.


----------



## wockawocka (Mar 17, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I can certainly see why a person might need some exposure correction, it seems like a unnecessary omission to me. I certainly plan to use the manual/ auto iso setting, and if I'd like to expose to the right, or correct a backlit situation, EC would be very useful.
> ...



Surely using Auto ISO in manual mode makes it an auto mode? Thus the need for exposure compensation (White walls, black suits)...etc.


----------



## kenraw (Mar 17, 2012)

I don't understand this fact that there isn't EC in maunual mode 
of course there isnt that's why its called manual mode, because you set the exposure yourself. If it's a little over exposed you just alter you f stop,shutter or iso to get the exposure where you want simple.

In manual i have the front dial to set aperture and my back dial to set shutter, so in effect its like using AV but changing the shutter now has the same effect as EC, as all EC does anyway is alter your shutter or aperture depending on which mode youre in av or tv.

So the auto iso will help out a bit here. however I find the limit of 1/250th a little low myself, but I suppose when you know your subject inside out auto iso is mainly for ameuters anyway.


----------



## bloodstupid (Mar 22, 2012)

You guys get any responses yet? I get that they will pass it on to their engineering guys..


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 22, 2012)

Of course there is EC in full manual mode. Just not with AutoISO unless you have a series 1 body


----------



## milnerstudios (Mar 23, 2012)

*Manual Mode 5D mark iii*

I have purchased the new 5d mk iii. which arrived today and have been testing it performance, especially the manual mode as thats what I shoot with the most. I hoped there would be an auto ISO setting for manual, which there is BUT
why cannot I set an exposure compensation while in Manual mode with auto ISO?
I always use manual mode to control shutter and aperture. I meter my exposures from my client's faces that are usually set at +1EV to accommodate light skin. Auto ISO would allow me to keep up with rapidly moving children as ISO speed is not so critical as shutter and aperture setting for me. I appreciate the new advantage of auto ISO that the mark ii did not have, but now my exposures will be a full stop under-exposed using the advantages of auto ISO with the mark iii


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 23, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



milnerstudios said:


> I have purchased the new 5d mk iii. which arrived today and have been testing it performance, especially the manual mode as thats what I shoot with the most. I hoped there would be an auto ISO setting for manual, which there is BUT
> why cannot I set an exposure compensation while in Manual mode with auto ISO?
> I always use manual mode to control shutter and aperture. I meter my exposures from my client's faces that are usually set at +1EV to accommodate light skin. Auto ISO would allow me to keep up with rapidly moving children as ISO speed is not so critical as shutter and aperture setting for me. I appreciate the new advantage of auto ISO that the mark ii did not have, but now my exposures will be a full stop under-exposed using the advantages of auto ISO with the mark iii


yep there was a big hooo haa about this the last couple of days i'll find the thread unless it got deleted because people got a bit excited

here you go
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4367.0.html


----------



## thure1982 (Mar 23, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



milnerstudios said:


> why cannot I set an exposure compensation while in Manual mode with auto ISO?



Because your in manual!
YOU set the exposure in the picture.
Exposure comensation means that the camera sets the exposure and then you tell it, one stop brighter please or that need to be 2 stops darker please and then the camera adjust likewise.

If you control the parameters manually then the camera cannot adjust them accordingly.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 23, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*

This is how to do it on a series 1 body - using AV mode

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4367.msg89997.html#msg89997


----------



## citro (Mar 23, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



thure1982 said:


> milnerstudios said:
> 
> 
> > why cannot I set an exposure compensation while in Manual mode with auto ISO?
> ...



thure1982 was talking about M+AutoISO and he is right.
Exposure is a product of apperture, shutter speed and ISO; each time you set camera on auto-something, it will default on standard exposure and – according the scene – EC might required. EG: during winter time, lack of EC leaves this mode useless.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 23, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



citro said:


> thure1982 said:
> 
> 
> > milnerstudios said:
> ...



Suggest you read the link - gives you what you want using another way


----------



## Bosman (Mar 24, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



milnerstudios said:


> I have purchased the new 5d mk iii. which arrived today and have been testing it performance, especially the manual mode as thats what I shoot with the most. I hoped there would be an auto ISO setting for manual, which there is BUT
> why cannot I set an exposure compensation while in Manual mode with auto ISO?
> I always use manual mode to control shutter and aperture. I meter my exposures from my client's faces that are usually set at +1EV to accommodate light skin. Auto ISO would allow me to keep up with rapidly moving children as ISO speed is not so critical as shutter and aperture setting for me. I appreciate the new advantage of auto ISO that the mark ii did not have, but now my exposures will be a full stop under-exposed using the advantages of auto ISO with the mark iii


When i put my 1DM3 in manual the meter in the window on top doesnt even show up because yea its manual if you swing your aperture way high or way low it will drop to over or under expose based on the range of your iso selection. The bigger the range of auto iso the more you will see the meter dead center. It actually works like a charm. Still it would be nioce like on your cam you can set the flash to always expose a third over. Of course i'd love that option even for manual. Maybe they could make the iso higher when you want a third over...hmmm


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 24, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



Bosman said:


> milnerstudios said:
> 
> 
> > I have purchased the new 5d mk iii. which arrived today and have been testing it performance, especially the manual mode as thats what I shoot with the most. I hoped there would be an auto ISO setting for manual, which there is BUT
> ...



Flash and auto iso is not a good mix


----------



## Bosman (Mar 24, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



briansquibb said:


> Bosman said:
> 
> 
> > milnerstudios said:
> ...


Test it out, i was curious last night in a drak room and without flash i had to use like 56,000 iso but with flash it dropped down to 400 iso in auto iso setting.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 24, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



Bosman said:


> Test it out, i was curious last night in a drak room and without flash i had to use like 56,000 iso but with flash it dropped down to 400 iso in auto iso setting.



Thank you I will - did it overpower the ambient at the same time?

I have till now used manual mode to control it all.


----------



## iso79 (Mar 24, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*

Learn exposure and how to shoot in manual mode and never look back.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 24, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



iso79 said:


> Learn exposure and how to shoot in manual mode and never look back.



Who was this aimed at?


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Mar 24, 2012)

I'm kind of summarizing this for myself, but hopefully this will help anyone joining into the conversation. I'm hoping to write an article on it later.

The problem with modern camera modes is they are out of date. Manual doesn't necessary mean fully manual. And automatic doesn't mean fully automatic.

Let look at the classic camera....Four modes which controlled whether the camera controlled aperture, shutter speeds, both, or neither...

Manual - Camera controlled nothing
Aperture priority - Aperture was manual, but shutter speed was automatic
Shutter priority - Shutter speed was manual, but aperture was automatic
Automatic/program mode - Aperture and Shutter speed are both automatic; The camera is making all the decisions;


Notice that nothing is said about ISO. While it was possible to set/change the ISO, generally it was fixed to the actual speed of the film being used. Without changing the film, it wasn't possible for ISO to be changed.

With digital cameras, ISO became as adjustable as aperture and shutter speed. What this really meant was we no longer need 4settings, but 8. Cameras could have been change to have
Manual & Manual ISO
Manual & Auto ISO
Aperture Priority & Manual ISO
Aperture Priority & Auto ISO
Shutter Priority & Manual ISO
Shutter Priority & Auto ISO
Auto/Program & Manual ISO
Auto/Program & Auto ISO

No camera does this. Nor have we gotten away from the program modes and simply switched over to a menu where we set each of the 3 possibilities to either manual or auto. This probably would be too foreign for classic photographers, but would get everyone in the right mindset. Instead, we left the four original settings, and have a separate ISO setting that is either the manually selected ISO or "Auto".

However, camera manufactures are forgetting that the classic manual mode, may still contain an automatic setting (ISO). If this is automatic, and EV adjustments aren't allowed, you actually have created a new, worse form of automatic. A situation where your manual settings of aperture and shutter speed, get ruined by the cameras automatic select of ISO. No matter what changes you make the camera can continue to make your exposure too light or dark.

This is the crux of the problem. Automatic mode can be partially manual (by manually setting the ISO) and manual mode can be partially automatic (by having the camera automatically set ISO). We need both photographers and camera manufactures to recognize the new combination of modes and fully support them. That means EV adjustment for everything except total (Aperture, shutter, ISO) manual mode.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 24, 2012)

CanineCandidsByL said:


> This is the crux of the problem. Automatic mode can be partially manual (by manually setting the ISO) and manual mode can be partially automatic (by having the camera automatically set ISO). We need both photographers and camera manufactures to recognize the new combination of modes and fully support them. That means EV adjustment for everything except total (Aperture, shutter, ISO) manual mode.



Did you not see the post that describes AV mode with auto ISO where the shutter speed is also set and EV adjustment is available? This is the equivalent to manual with auto iso _*PLUS EC*_

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4367.msg94459.html#msg94459


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Mar 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Did you not see the post that describes AV mode with auto ISO where the shutter speed is also set and EV adjustment is available? This is the equivalent to manual with auto iso _*PLUS EC*_
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4367.msg94459.html#msg94459



I have now....sorry, and thank you.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 25, 2012)

CanineCandidsByL said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Did you not see the post that describes AV mode with auto ISO where the shutter speed is also set and EV adjustment is available? This is the equivalent to manual with auto iso _*PLUS EC*_
> ...



8) 8) 8) 8)


----------



## bloodstupid (Mar 25, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



briansquibb said:


> This is how to do it on a series 1 body - using AV mode
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4367.msg89997.html#msg89997



The original complaint was about the 5d III, what a 1 series can do isnt much of a help.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 25, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



bloodstupid said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > This is how to do it on a series 1 body - using AV mode
> ...



You are quite correct - but this was a response to a post that was generically discussing modes. If you looked through the threads you would have found that the 5DIII has a crippled version of this approach.


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 25, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



iso79 said:


> Learn exposure and how to shoot in manual mode and never look back.



i wish i had an applaud button to hit repeatedly in agreement with you here


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 25, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



wickidwombat said:


> iso79 said:
> 
> 
> > Learn exposure and how to shoot in manual mode and never look back.
> ...



I agree in that I use M most of the time, sometimes with autoiso, sometimes not. Although now I have discovered the faux M mode which allows ec I am starting to use that (series 1 only)


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 25, 2012)

faux m mode?


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 25, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> faux m mode?



This only applies to Series 1. Basically set mode to AV and set shutter speed in C.fn 1 - 12 (setting min and max the same ) means the iso becomes auto - but because you are in AV you have ec as well. This approach gives the same functionality as M mode - hence the faux M mode.



> Objective: Set set a minimum and maximum shutter speed. In Av mode if the shutter speed dropped below the mimimum then the ISO would be bumped up so that the minimum was reached again.
> 
> Method:
> 
> ...


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 25, 2012)

ah gotcha

personally i find shooting in M the fastest way with shutter speed at my finger tip having to press a button for ec takes too long

I havent actually even tried auto iso on the mk3 yet 

so much to try out so little time


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 25, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> ah gotcha
> 
> personally i find shooting in M the fastest way with shutter speed at my finger tip having to press a button for ec takes too long
> 
> ...



I think it has its place - ie sports where you know how fast you need the shutter speed and the av is the one to change (for dof) and know that the iso will follow you

You can also do a faux TV mode but I haven't worked out how useful that might be - setting the av in the settings and varying the TV - again perhaps sports for fast and slow corners and panning. Personally it is av I change most to get the right dof which is dependant on how close you are to the subject


----------



## ejenner (Mar 26, 2012)

This thread just show how brainwashed Canon shooters have become. Shoot M becasue the metering doesn't work? But it SHOULD work, this is 2012, not 1960, why can't we have a DSLR with M AND metering that works? - Oh, because it's a Canon and only 'real' photographers should try to use a Canon anD they shouldn't even have Av or Tv modes anyway, never mind auto ISO? Give me a break!

I'm in agreement with the OP. Plain stupid not having EC with M+auto ISO (or they could have called it something else if the 'M' in that setup is confusing).

Sounds like the 5DIII is again less useful in this regard than decent (Canon) compacts - so actually the company does know how to do this.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 26, 2012)

ejenner said:


> This thread just show how brainwashed Canon shooters have become. Shoot M becasue the metering doesn't work? But it SHOULD work, this is 2012, not 1960, why can't we have a DSLR with M AND metering that works? - Oh, because it's a Canon and only 'real' photographers should try to use a Canon anD they shouldn't even have Av or Tv modes anyway, never mind auto ISO? Give me a break!
> 
> I'm in agreement with the OP. Plain stupid not having EC with M+auto ISO (or they could have called it something else if the 'M' in that setup is confusing).
> 
> Sounds like the 5DIII is again less useful in this regard than decent (Canon) compacts - so actually the company does know how to do this.



That shows just how anti Canon you are. Presented with the method that is EC with M+Auto ISO you are in total denial.


----------



## D.Sim (Mar 26, 2012)

ejenner said:


> This thread just show how brainwashed Canon shooters have become. Shoot M becasue the metering doesn't work? But it SHOULD work, this is 2012, not 1960, why can't we have a DSLR with M AND metering that works? - Oh, because it's a Canon and only 'real' photographers should try to use a Canon anD they shouldn't even have Av or Tv modes anyway, never mind auto ISO? Give me a break!
> 
> I'm in agreement with the OP. Plain stupid not having EC with M+auto ISO (or they could have called it something else if the 'M' in that setup is confusing).
> 
> Sounds like the 5DIII is again less useful in this regard than decent (Canon) compacts - so actually the company does know how to do this.



Nikon Rumours is THAT way...

If you're so anti Canon, why are you even here?


----------



## ejenner (Mar 26, 2012)

D.Sim said:


> Nikon Rumours is THAT way...
> 
> If you're so anti Canon, why are you even here?



Because I'm not anti-Canon. I've only every had Canon DLSR's and now even all my compacts are all Canon. Just becasue I'm a Canon fan doesn't mean I don't get frustrated with their cameras sometimes.

But, instead of posting on a forum, emailing them directly would be more useful.


----------



## ejenner (Mar 26, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Presented with the method that is EC with M+Auto ISO you are in total denial.



For 1D series cameras? OK, but I'm too weak to lug one of those around, so we get penalized for not being 'butch' enough?


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 26, 2012)

ejenner said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Presented with the method that is EC with M+Auto ISO you are in total denial.
> ...



The fact is that it is there.

Butch?? What has sexual orientation got to do with cameras?


----------



## awinphoto (Mar 26, 2012)

ejenner said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Presented with the method that is EC with M+Auto ISO you are in total denial.
> ...



Not at all, that's what assistants/bags/family members/significant others are for. =) If you get the right support system/strap/etc if could make a world of difference on weight.


----------



## bloodstupid (May 7, 2012)

Chuck didnt mention our thing in the Planet5D video, we need to send him more mails...


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 7, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



iso79 said:


> Learn exposure and how to shoot in manual mode and never look back.



Oh thats right! Because anyone who uses a semi auto mode totally misunderstands how to expose!!

Ridiculous. Different tools for different jobs. I'd like to see you change exposure when you have 1/10 second to do so.


----------



## AvTvM (May 7, 2012)

for those who understand what Auto-ISO is and have use for it in their photography, Canon is still not offering a good implementation of the feature. While 1-series cams at least offer some more or lesse clumsy work-arounds, all other bodies have intensily annoying limitations to Auto-ISO functionality, although this is just a cheap and easy firmware item.

Compared to what would be REALLY RIGHT in an advanced DSLR of 2012, the Nikon D4 & D800 come closest: 
1. EC correction available in M-mode with Auto-ISO ... YES
2. Minimum threshold for shutter time 1s to 1/4000 [not limited to 1/250s] ... YES 
3. In modes A, P where cam determines shutter-speed, focal length is taken into account ... YES 
4. this shutter speed can be further fine-tuned slower/faster by user ... YES
5. Auto-ISO in D800 [@ € 2800] not crippled, but exactly as in flagship-model D4 @ 6k ... YES

-> http://www.nikonusa.com/en_US/o/Y6wrkA9OU_z04IreazIXl_22UII/PDF/D800_TechnicalGuide_En.pdf
on page 12 you can see, how smart and easy Auto-ISO can and should be in 2012: 

This is the MINIMUM I expect in a camera 20% MORE EXPENSIVE than the D800 ... if Canon wants me to buy it.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> for those who understand what Auto-ISO is and have use for it in their photography, Canon is still not offering a good implementation of the feature. While 1-series cams at least offer some more or lesse clumsy work-arounds, all other bodies have intensily annoying limitations to Auto-ISO functionality, although this is just a cheap and easy firmware item.
> 
> Compared to what would be REALLY RIGHT in an advanced DSLR of 2012, the Nikon D4 & D800 come closest:
> 1. EC correction available in M-mode with Auto-ISO ... YES
> ...



All these points can be done in the 1D4 (except for #3 as there is no P mode)


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> All these points can be done in the 1D4 (except for #3 as there is no P mode)



OMG, no P mode? I'll have to cancel my 1D X pre-order, unless Canon has rectified that glaring oversight.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > All these points can be done in the 1D4 (except for #3 as there is no P mode)
> ...



I really miss the green square


----------



## plam_1980 (May 7, 2012)

*Re: Manual Mode 5D mark iii*



PhilDrinkwater said:


> iso79 said:
> 
> 
> > Learn exposure and how to shoot in manual mode and never look back.
> ...



You are so right! All Canon apologists should not ne bashing people who want a feature that can come handy in many situations and that is present in the bodies from the competition - are all people who got Nikon D4 & D800 bad photographers? Before anyone accuses me of being a Nikon troll - I have only Canon equipment and planned to go full frame and further invest in glass but all this elitist and arrogant attitude from the company and fanboys makes me suspicious


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I really miss the green square



I know you jest, but I _will_ sort of miss it - I use back-button AF among other customizations on my cameras, and the green square mode was useful when I wanted to hand the camera to someone to take a picture with me in it. I'll learn to live with it...


----------



## AvTvM (May 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Compared to what would be REALLY RIGHT in an advanced DSLR of 2012, the Nikon D4 & D800 come closest:
> ...



Wrong!

5D3 Auto ISO - which is main subject in this thread - sucks on all five points. 
And 1D IV also falls way short ... 

Specifically:
1. only available via twisted workaround in "faux M-mode" ... using Av and setting min and ma shutter speed to the same value. 
3. focal-length-aware shutter-times in Av,P mode plus Auto-ISO not available in any current Canon EOS body 
4. also not available in any current Canon EOS body 
5. all Canon EOS below 1 series are artificially crippled in their Auto-ISO functionality for "marketing differtiation" reasons. Annoyingly so, even and especially where pure firmware items are concerned. 

Compared to "2012 gold standard" [Nikon D800, D4] Auto-ISO functionality in all Canon EOS bodies is inferior ... big time in anything including 5D 2, considerably in 7D and 5D3, still quite a bit in 1D IV / 1D X.

If you don't need it or use it due to personal preferences and or shooting situations, fine. But there are many others, who would love to have and rightfully expect Canon to deliver more bang for the buck on this.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Sorry but you are totally wrong on point #1 The 1D4 has an even better feature than you are asking for. You set the minimum to whatever you want and the maximum to 1/8000. So if the iso gets to 100 but that would overexpose then the shutter speed increases approriately. I am sorry that you think that using the function as intended is such a bad thing but it does the job and does in in a failsafe fashion

#2 the minimum is setable from 30s to 1/8000 in the 1D4

#3 yes - http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/camera_settings/shooting_modes.do

#4 this is available on the 1D4

#5 Auto iso is NOT crippled in the 1D4

I find it disappointing that you have decided to have anti Canon/pro Nikon rant. It sounds like you have never used a series 1 Canon and that you have sucumbed to the 'D800 is greatest' brainwashing.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I find it disappointing that you have decided to have anti Canon/pro Nikon rant. It sounds like you have never used a series 1 Canon and that you have sucumbed to the 'D800 is greatest' brainwashing.



The next logical response is that with Canon you need to spend thousands more to get those features, compared to the D800.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I find it disappointing that you have decided to have anti Canon/pro Nikon rant. It sounds like you have never used a series 1 Canon and that you have sucumbed to the 'D800 is greatest' brainwashing.
> ...



.... if the D800 is what you want 8) 8) 8)


----------



## AvTvM (May 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Sorry but you are totally wrong on point #1 The 1D4 has an even better feature than you are asking for. You set the minimum to whatever you want and the maximum to 1/8000. So if the iso gets to 100 but that would overexpose then the shutter speed increases approriately. I am sorry that you think that using the function as intended is such a bad thing but it does the job and does in in a failsafe fashion



only applicable in "Av" mode. D800/D4 will do the same, only (theoretical) advantage of the 1D IV is the range of shutter times between 1s and 30s in combination with Auto ISO:


briansquibb said:


> #2 the minimum is setable from 30s to 1/8000 in the 1D4



As far as #3 and #4 are concerned the D800/D4 are way better ... beacuase the 1D IV will not
* automatically set shutter speed to 1/focal length in Av and P in Auto-ISO [#3] 
* and allow the user to choose to apply a correction factor to that auto funtion for faster or longer shutter times. [#4]



briansquibb said:


> #3 yes - http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/camera_settings/shooting_modes.do


If you refer to the "program line" in the link you provided ... this only applies to "P" mode ... and only to time+aperture combinations @ a chosen ISO setting. It is not at all an equivalent of the D800/D4 "ISO Sensitivity" function in Auto-ISO. 

But since you state in an earlier post 


briansquibb said:


> All these points can be done in the 1D4 (except for #3 *as there is no P mode*)


you may want to try out the instructions in the Canon-link you provided:
"To set the shooting mode on EOS-1D and 1Ds series cameras press the Mode button (top left) and then turn the electronic input dial. The mode selected (*P*, Tv, Av or M) will appear in the top left of the LCD panel."



briansquibb said:


> I find it disappointing that you have decided to have anti Canon/pro Nikon rant. It sounds like you have never used a series 1 Canon and that you have sucumbed to the 'D800 is greatest' brainwashing.



I find it disappointing that even in 2012 Canon is still not able to provide competitive Auto-ISO functionality, especially since all of it simply is a cheap firmeware item. 

I find it even more disappointing, that Canon has brought out an inferior, firmware-crippled camera and is charging 20% more for it than Nikon asks for a camera that has way better IQ and bests the 5D3 in practically every other respect, with the sole exception of fps. Heck, as far as IQ is concerned, it is probably even a better crop camera than my 7D. 

And I find it disappointing, that any Canon-critical discusion is immediately termed "Anti-Canon rant" around here.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry but you are totally wrong on point #1 The 1D4 has an even better feature than you are asking for. You set the minimum to whatever you want and the maximum to 1/8000. So if the iso gets to 100 but that would overexpose then the shutter speed increases approriately. I am sorry that you think that using the function as intended is such a bad thing but it does the job and does in in a failsafe fashion
> ...



Yep you are right I haven't used P mode and I had forgotten that it was there - I RTFM and corrected myself.

You are right about the speed in AV mode - but then I am setting the speed as in #1 and I can work out for myself that a 400mm lens means a shutter speed of 1/500 - I dont need the camera to work that one out for me so it is just not relevant.

Perhaps you need to RTFM before slating a manufacturer?

When someone posts a post that basically is incorrect in the facts to make the point that Canon is useless and Nikon is wonderful


> I find it even more disappointing, that Canon has brought out an inferior, firmware-crippled camera and is charging 20% more for it than Nikon asks for a camera that has way better IQ and bests the 5D3 in practically every other respect, with the sole exception of fps.


 and is saying that all Canon cameras are not up to the job- it comes across as an anti Canon rant - especially as the thread is not comparing Canon with Nikon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> I find it disappointing that even in 2012 Canon is still not able to provide competitive Auto-ISO functionality, especially since all of it simply is a cheap firmeware item.



Me, too. I'd certainly like to have EC available when using Auto ISO in M mode.




AvTvM said:


> And I find it disappointing, that any Canon-critical discusion is immediately termed "Anti-Canon rant" around here.



From what I've seen, well-reasoned and fairly presented posts which are critical of Canon are well received by most here. But people do consider the source, and when the source is clearly biased, the posts come off as trolling, and generate a pretty harsh response. I looked back through the last 30 or so of your posts, here are some excerpts:


"_Canon has brought out an inferior, firmware-crippled camera..._"
"_Canon will move very slowly and half-heartedly on this..._"
"_ Canon's [should]... quickly reduce price of 5D3 below price of competitors' superior product_"
"_ 5D III is overpriced. Nikon D800 is both a much better camera and a much better value._"

And my personal favorite:


"_Sepcifically, Canon F_____ up when they..._"

You're dissatisfied with Canon. We get it. b\Beating your personal dead horse over and over may be cathartic for you, but it gets old. Please, go buy a D800. You'll love that it's so much better than the 5DIII you don't have, you'll love all those recently-released high-IQ lenses from Nikon (maybe you won't love their comparatively higher prices so much, though), you'll love the famed Nikon ergonomics, I bet you'll even love the spiffy gold box the D800 comes in. 

BTW, you realize you'll have to change your handle, right? "AvTvM" won't win you any friends on the Nikon forums, you might try ASM instead.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Me, too. I'd certainly like to have EC available when using Auto ISO in M mode.



You will get it with the 1DX


----------



## Razor2012 (May 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > I find it disappointing that even in 2012 Canon is still not able to provide competitive Auto-ISO functionality, especially since all of it simply is a cheap firmeware item.
> ...



In other words...don't go away mad, just go away.


----------



## sarangiman (May 7, 2012)

I just wish Auto ISO worked w/ EC in M mode... You could say 'just shoot Av' instead, but M allows you to, say, set a minimum shutter speed much more easily than going into Auto ISO settings to change the min shutter speed (which may depend on your setting, focal length, etc.). Auto ISO in M at least allows me to, in dim environments say, set the aperture to the widest setting I'm comfortable with for the DOF I'm looking for, then set the shutter speed to the minimum I feel is appropriate for the lighting/focal length/movement in my scene, then the camera does the rest. That's exactly what I can do right now, just without EC.

Shooting in this manner in Av doesn't allow me to change that 'minimum shutter speed' as quickly as just turning a dial in M, yes?


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> I just wish Auto ISO worked w/ EC in M mode... You could say 'just shoot Av' instead, but M allows you to, say, set a minimum shutter speed much more easily than going into Auto ISO settings to change the min shutter speed (which may depend on your setting, focal length, etc.). Auto ISO in M at least allows me to, in dim environments say, set the aperture to the widest setting I'm comfortable with for the DOF I'm looking for, then set the shutter speed to the minimum I feel is appropriate for the lighting/focal length/movement in my scene, then the camera does the rest. That's exactly what I can do right now, just without EC.
> 
> Shooting in this manner in Av doesn't allow me to change that 'minimum shutter speed' as quickly as just turning a dial in M, yes?



You are right changing the minimum shutter speed is 4 operations on the menu system - but fine if you only want limited numbers of changes. Else it is the standard M with Autoiso and work in pp. I change the minimum shutter speed when I am changing lens or shooting style to panning - so it is not a big hardship for me - the pros definitely outweigh the cons


----------



## sarangiman (May 7, 2012)

> Else it is the standard M with Autoiso and work in pp.



Post-processing EC instead of ISO change would be fine if Canon sensors had lower read noise & were closer to the theoretical 'ISO-less' camera... but my tests with my 5D Mark III show that even ISO 6400 is better than ISO 1600 + 2stops in post. Haven't seen similar tests with the D800 yet but my guess is that it stands up better to EC in PP than the Canon due to its lower read noise.

So I would say it behooves Canon even more to implement better Auto ISO, since optimizing ISO for a shot is more important on Canon than it is for Nikon, given the higher read noise on Canon sensors.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > Else it is the standard M with Autoiso and work in pp.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do you change the shutter speed whilst you are shooting then?


----------



## sarangiman (May 7, 2012)

> Do you change the shutter speed whilst you are shooting then?



Not exactly sure what you're asking but I'll try to answer: sometimes at a reception I will choose f/2.0 on my 85mm lens (for some room for AF error), & will try a bunch of shutter speeds to see what the minimum shutter speed I can get away with is for the lighting in that environment. Then, I'd like Auto ISO to do its thing.

But say some action starts happening (the speaker giving a speech starts moving fast). I need to up my shutter speed. This is the sort of scenario where Auto ISO + M mode is incredibly useful. I might then want EC on top of that.

Granted, I've only begun to shoot with Auto ISO since I found it largely unusable on my 5D Mark II. So I'm not crying excessively about the poor implementation because I just haven't used it much to begin with. But that doesn't mean that I wouldn't benefit from a better implementation that would encourage me to use Auto ISO even more.

Also, I'd love the ability to tell the camera to only jump *full stops* in Auto ISO mode. No use shooting ISO 125 or 160 since those are *push/pulls* that actually *lower DR*. I can limit it to full stops when I manually select ISO -- _why doesn't that preference transfer over to Auto ISO??_


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> _why doesn't that preference transfer over to Auto ISO??_



If it did, how would the camera expose 'correctly' if you adjusted the aperture or shutter speed by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop?


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

I haven't got a 5DIII so cant really help with the details of that. It wouldn't be a problem with the 1D4, but that may be different in details

I would be inclined to fix the shutter speed at the 1/focal length and then shoot all night like that - at least you would avoid motion blur issues.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> sarangiman said:
> 
> 
> > _why doesn't that preference transfer over to Auto ISO??_
> ...



You would only be able to correct it in pp - which will give about the same result if auto adjusted by 1/3


----------



## sarangiman (May 8, 2012)

> If it did, how would the camera expose 'correctly' if you adjusted the aperture or shutter speed by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop?



Fair enough, but I'd take the exposure being 1/3 stop off over potential DR loss. Better yet, if removal of that 2nd amplification step altogether lowered the overall read noise (based off of Martinec's analysis), I'd be a proponent of removing those intermediate ISOs completely!

But I bet I'd be in the minority on that one


----------



## AvTvM (May 8, 2012)

Razor2012 said:


> In other words...don't go away mad, just go away.


negative. Hate to disappoint you, but as long as I buy and use Canon gear to capture my photos I feel fully entitled to whack them over the head when they deliver sub-par photographic tools. 



sarangiman said:


> Post-processing EC instead of ISO change would be fine if Canon sensors had lower read noise & were closer to the theoretical 'ISO-less' camera... but my tests with my 5D Mark III show that even ISO 6400 is better than ISO 1600 + 2stops in post. Haven't seen similar tests with the D800 yet but my guess is that it stands up better to EC in PP than the Canon due to its lower read noise.
> 
> So I would say it behooves Canon even more to implement better Auto ISO, since optimizing ISO for a shot is more important on Canon than it is for Nikon, given the higher read noise on Canon sensors.


+1 ... exactly!



briansquibb said:


> I would be inclined to fix the shutter speed at the 1/focal length and then shoot all night like that - at least you would avoid motion blur issues.


as a matter of fact, this is exactly what a Nikon D800/D4 lets you do (in A and P modes, points #3 and #4 from my list) ... fully automatically, based on the focal length of the lens attached or the focal length a zoom lens is set to. And if a situation demands somewhat faster shutter times (than 1/focal length) or the action is slow enough to allow somewhat slower shutter times, just dial in "faster or slower" in Auto-ISO sensitivity control. As a matter of fact, Nikon users also had to whack Nikon over the head for years until they finally got a truly functional Auto-ISO model ... ;-) 

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1690347434/first-impressions-using-the-nikon-d800
_"The D800's automatic ISO mode is inherited from the D4 and is improved over the same mode in earlier Nikon DSLRs. Previously, auto ISO customization was minimal, and consisted simply of an option to set the maximum ISO and minimum shutter speed when the camera was used in auto ISO mode. The currently-set ISO counted as the minimum ISO sensitivity (and in fact still does). This system was fine for shooting with a fixed focal length lens, but less useful with zoom lenses, where a 'safe' minimum shutter speed at either end of the focal range might be several stops apart. 

In the D4 and D800, Nikon has (at long last) added an 'Auto' option to the minimum shutter speed options, which allows the camera to automatically set the minimum shutter speed based on its knowledge of the focal length that you're working at. This response can be biased in 5 steps, from 'slow' to 'fast' depending on whether you'd like the camera to err on the side of slower or faster shutter speeds. A small change but one that takes Auto ISO a little closer to being the 'set and forget' function that it should have been long ago."_

The Auto-ISO implementation in the D800/D4 really is a world apart from Canon's clumsy approach - especially as far as the 5D3 goes. 

Good thing is, Canon can easlily correct the situation any day with just a simple firmware update. ALl we need to do is to demand that update vigorously and might as well get it. Similar to what the video guys (Planet5D et al.) achieved for the 5D 2 after whacking Canon over the head for a year or so.


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> as a matter of fact, this is exactly what a Nikon D800/D4 lets you do (in A and P modes, points #3 and #4 from my list) ... fully automatically, based on the focal length of the lens attached or the focal length a zoom lens is set to.



Yawn .... series 1 already does this in P mode ....

But then how many people using these pro level cameras use P mode on a regular basis


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 8, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> Good thing is, Canon can easlily correct the situation any day with just a simple firmware update. ALl we need to do is to demand that update vigorously and might as well get it. Similar to what the video guys (Planet5D et al.) achieved for the 5D 2 after whacking Canon over the head for a year or so.



I've sent my feedback in via a Canon UK rep and I agree with all who say that it's wrong - it clearly is wrong. If you have an auto mode (which auto ISO is) you need EC to correct for the fact that your camera will meter to average grey. Not providing it is just wrong. In fact, I sent them the same feedback about the 5d2 but they clearly didn't listen 

I've said it in another thread, but I honestly believe Canon need to start listening to actual photographers more...

I've worked in development for a long time and it's like when developers write a massive amount of code to allow a feature to be implemented, but then don't spend the last 10% making the feature effective to use. Canon seem to be missing "feature designers" somehow...

All that said, I think the 5d3 is a great camera. I just think they are not putting enough effort into finishing off the little bits 

(of course this isn't an issue if you'll never use auto ISO).


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> I've sent my feedback in via a Canon UK rep and I agree with all who say that it's wrong - it clearly is wrong. If you have an auto mode (which auto ISO is) you need EC to correct for the fact that your camera will meter to average grey. Not providing it is just wrong. In fact, I sent them the same feedback about the 5d2 but they clearly didn't listen



This can be done with series 1



PhilDrinkwater said:


> (of course this isn't an issue if you'll never use auto ISO).



AutoISO part of my is my default mode - complete with ec available

: : I wonder ow many times I will have to say this ... : :


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 8, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> This can be done with series 1



Series 1?


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > This can be done with series 1
> ...



1D4/1DX


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 8, 2012)

Ahh! I know those a 1 series not series 1 

I guess my point is that I'm not buying one of those...


----------



## AvTvM (May 8, 2012)

while this thread is about Auto-ISO on the Canon 5D3 ... and it's shortcomings, unfortunately Briansquibb keeps talking of his 1D ... and also seems to be unwilling or unable ? to understand the Nikon D800/D4 Auto-ISO implementation and why it is superior to any current Canon DSLR, including "the 1 series".


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> Ahh! I know those a 1 series not series 1
> 
> I guess my point is that I'm not buying one of those...



The problem in this thread is that all Canon bodies are being stated as not having P mode with auto iso and fine shutter speed adjustment nor AV/manual mode with ec. The 1D4 has this as will the 1DX. The eroneous facts are then being used to slate Canon and praise Nikon which have the function with the D800 and the D4

I am sure we could find functionality that is in the Canon but not in the Nikon if we were in to trolling


----------



## bloodstupid (May 8, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> PhilDrinkwater said:
> 
> 
> > Ahh! I know those a 1 series not series 1
> ...



Actually this thread is about the 5D MIII, nothing else.


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

bloodstupid said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > PhilDrinkwater said:
> ...



You are correct in that was how it started - however it widened into all Canon bodies. I dont have a 5DIII but looking through the user manual it is obvious that Canon have gone part way to the requirements for the 5DIII - but not as far as the 1 series. 

For example in P mode you can use auto iso, ec and fine adjust the shutter speed. M mode + ec doesn't seem possible


----------



## AvTvM (May 8, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> ... looking through the user manual it is obvious that Canon have gone part way to the requirements for the 5DIII - but not as far as the 1 series.
> For example in P mode you can use auto iso, ec and fine adjust the shutter speed. M mode + ec doesn't seem possible



correct ... BUT "fine adjustment" of shutter speed in mode "P" and Auto-ISO on a Canon 5D3 (and all others) is done "manually" by user turning the front wheel to select a different aperture/shutter time combination. It is not possible to select a slower shutter speed than the underlying Canon "program line" minimum shutter speed ... which seems to be 1/focal length. 

In Nikon's D800/D4 Auto-ISO implementation, users can directly influence the "progam line" in Auto-ISO-sensitivity control to have the cam use faster or slower minimum shutter speeds than 1/focal length. That way it is also possible to use (somewhat) slower shutters speeds than 1/focal length in Auto-ISO and "P", "A"(v) modes. 

I am not aware of a possibility for Canon users to modify the "program line" on 5D 3 or other current Canon EOS models including 1 series to achieve the same. Interestingly, Canon does no longer include program-line charts in the manuals for the "newer" DSLRs with Auto-ISO - so we don't know exactly, how these cameras respond and adjust the 3 variables [aperture, time, sensor amplification] under various lighting situations. 

Also, the Nikon Auto-ISO implementation works the same way in "P" and "A" mode, if minimum shutter speed is set to "Auto". I am not sure, whether Canon's "program line" also works the same way in "Av" mode and in "P" mode [Program-AE] 


btw: even in the Nikon D800/D4 Auto-ISO implementation the cam does not automatically sense, whether IS [VR] is available in the lens and switched ON and then modify the "default" minimum shutter speed to "slower". Nikon aparently decided to leave any correction of the 1/focal length minimum shutter speed up to the user and his assessment what the situation requires to avoid shake and motion blur on moving subjects. 

Furthermore, even in Nikon's latest and more advanced implementation users cannot set rules/parameters to fully customize camera's behaviour in Auto-ISO. 

All of these shortcomings just demonstrate how awfully slow camera manufacturers are in changing from the old film-based auto-exposure model with fixed ISO and only 2 variables (shutter speed and aperture) to the digital model with 3 variables. As far as I am concerned I would expect ANY DSLR in 2012 - with the possible exception of the very lowest end models - to give users full and direct control over all three exposure parameters in all operating modes and in a coherent and intuitive user interface.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 8, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> PhilDrinkwater said:
> 
> 
> > Ahh! I know those a 1 series not series 1
> ...



Are you suggesting I'm trolling? Because all I'm aware of doing is pointing out something which stops the feature working correctly.


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > PhilDrinkwater said:
> ...



Not at all and I cannot see any suggestion from me that you have. I haven't seen a Canon user trolling Nikon yet - considering how much trolling of Canon has been happening on this forum I am pleased to see that that it hasn't been reciprocated


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 8, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> PhilDrinkwater said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



OK that's why I was asking... I wasn't sure...


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > PhilDrinkwater said:
> ...




8) 8) 8) 8)


----------



## sarangiman (May 8, 2012)

The talk of the 1-series brings up an interesting point: Canon holds back features from lower cameras while Nikon doesn't fear lower-end cameras cannibalizing sales of their higher end cameras. E.g. the AF in the D700/800-- this sort of competition is good, b/c then Canon knows it can't get away with *not* placing a pro-AF system in the 5D series. People shouldn't be forced to spend $7k & buy the highest end camera just to get a camera that can focus... one would think that's basic functionality  If you care about your customer base, the decision to go to 1-series should be based on more specialized features-- FPS, e.g., or the customizable focus screens, etc. Those I'm ok with. But the ability to focus with anything outside of the center focus point? C'mon. I'm glad Canon didn't cripple the AF in the 5DIII; it's amazing in use so far!



> as a matter of fact, this is exactly what a Nikon D800/D4 lets you do (in A and P modes, points #3 and #4 from my list) ... fully automatically, based on the focal length of the lens attached or the focal length a zoom lens is set to.



Actually, I think the *fastest* way to change the effective minimum shutter speed as you're swapping out lenses would be to shoot in M mode... you pick the aperture best suited for your subjects, then you dial in the shutter speed w/ the main dial -- you can change it on the fly without any button presses, just by turning the dial! Then Auto ISO takes care of the rest. This is effectively what you can do in M mode... just without EC on the Canon. So that's a huge limitation, IMHO.

As for the whole 'fast' vs. 'slow' algorithms for changing ISO -- I believe that's more complicated... dunno if Canon will implement that in firmware... would be nice, but would probably be a lot of code to add. EC in M mode is a must though.

As for Auto ISO w/ flash in M mode... I'm kind of ambivalent... I like to set shutter speed/aperture/ISO to a setting that gives me some background exposure of my choosing, not the camera's choosing... then vary off-camera flash power for the correct amount of lighting on the subject. Auto ISO here seems unnecessary/complicated... but someone's welcome to present a scenario to change my mind here


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Then Auto ISO takes care of the rest. This is effectively what you can do in M mode... just without EC on the Canon. So that's a huge limitation, IMHO.
> 
> As for the whole 'fast' vs. 'slow' algorithms for changing ISO -- I believe that's more complicated... dunno if Canon will implement that in firmware... would be nice, but would probably be a lot of code to add. EC in M mode is a must though.
> 
> As for Auto ISO w/ flash in M mode... I'm kind of ambivalent... I like to set shutter speed/aperture/ISO to a setting that gives me some background exposure of my choosing, not the camera's choosing... then vary off-camera flash power for the correct amount of lighting on the subject. Auto ISO here seems unnecessary/complicated... but someone's welcome to present a scenario to change my mind here



I think for M mode it should be ec for auto iso. In non auto iso M mode you have ec already

Auto iso for flash works OK for infill. You also have FEC to play with to get the flash/ambient balance correct


----------



## sarangiman (May 8, 2012)

> I think for M mode it should be ec for auto iso. In non auto iso M mode you have ec already



OK! So we're all in agreement then! 

Where do we most effectively bug Canon about this sort of thing? I'd be happy to submit a request.


----------



## briansquibb (May 8, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > I think for M mode it should be ec for auto iso. In non auto iso M mode you have ec already
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I guess as we have ec, fec then we are after 'aiec' ;D


----------



## criza (May 8, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> The trouble with Auto ISO in Av mode now is that the camera chooses changing ISO before changing shutter speed and I hate that. Shutter speed doesn't affect image quality much after it reaches a minimum threshold for getting the shot, but ISO does.
> 
> If I could tell the camera to ONLY change ISO to keep the shutter speed from dipping below, say 1/1000, otherwise change shutter speed, that would solve my problem of constantly having to make small adjustments. As it stands now, I'm constantly making adjustments to minimize ISO and still get the shot.
> 
> That would be very powerful and be extremely helpful to sports togs who deal with rapidly changing lighting conditions.



That is the only thing that I am missing as well, on my Canon 60D! (besides microfocus adjustment) 8)


*AND*, I am guessing LetTheRightLensIn would be satisfied as well with this feature on the 5DIII, because that would let you forget about the missing EC in M mode, right?!


See here:


LetTheRightLensIn said:


> 2. So then you are like well they added min. shutter speed to Auto ISO now so at least we might be able to often get away with using Av mode instead. BUT, they make the maximum allowed min speed only 1/250th??? They limit it from 1 second to 1/250th?! What!? What does 1/250th do you for action?? And if you are using 1 second long exposures and stuff you surely have enough time to adjust the ISO as needed manually anyway.
> Wow. It is so beyond absurd. Why on earth do they limit it? It makes no sense.


----------



## briansquibb (May 9, 2012)

criza said:


> smirkypants said:
> 
> 
> > The trouble with Auto ISO in Av mode now is that the camera chooses changing ISO before changing shutter speed and I hate that. Shutter speed doesn't affect image quality much after it reaches a minimum threshold for getting the shot, but ISO does.
> ...



This is done in the 1D4 - perhaps just adding it to the 5DIII would resolve the issue


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> This is done in the 1D4 - perhaps just adding it to the 5DIII would resolve the issue



I agree.

I do think Canon have had a "scared to hit the 1 series too much" mentality. The 1 series cameras have several options which would be really useful which are just firmware tweaks. They have been deliberately NOT included, even those the code is available. These things help photographers do their jobs. Very few photographers will pay another £2k for these features, so by not including them Canon are actually _not helping photographers_.

I can understand them not putting those options on a very low end cameras but - let's be honest - the 5d is a pro camera and used by a massive amount of pros all over the world. The same was true with the 5dii. So, as a new mentality: "who buys the 5d and what do they need". 

As a key point, I had the money to buy a 1dx but decided not to since the 5d3's shutter is quieter, especially in silent mode. That means suddenly I can't have all of the extra options that the 1 series has. That doesn't seem fair - it's not that I won't pay, it's that I don't want that camera.

I know with the 5d they've moved away from their previous path of "don't hit the 1 series" some way but I think they could go further:
* 1d - you're paying for shutter actuations, fps, build quality.
* 5d - same options and internal electronics but not as fast / solid / strong / weather proof / long lasting.

...or bring out a "3d" which is a 5d but with upgraded internals like the 1 series and charge £4k for it. But at least give people the choice.

Let's face it, the people who want a 1d now are mainly sports photographers, maybe some PJ, people who shoot in all weather conditions or people who shoot gazillions of frames. Otherwise the 5d (with a battery grip) is pretty much the same camera.

So Canon - you've done well with this latest round, but giving people more useful options with the 5d will help to gain you more respect from your customers and stop the constant comparisons with "the other side" who do seem to have a different mentality :


----------



## sarangiman (May 9, 2012)

I just posted this in another Auto ISO thread, but thought it was relevant here:

Auto ISO in the presence of attached flash:

In M mode, whether the flash is in 'bounce' mode or not, Auto ISO locks ISO at 400.

In A/Tv modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-400, again whether or not flash in 'bounce' mode.

In P/A+ modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-1600 if flash is in 'bounce' mode; ISO 100-400 if not in 'bounce' mode.

My head hurts. Anyone want to explain the rationale behind this?


----------



## bloodstupid (May 9, 2012)

Canon rumours talks about a feature-update firmware, i wonder if it will improve AutoIso.


----------



## AvTvM (May 9, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Auto ISO in the presence of attached flash:
> In M mode, whether the flash is in 'bounce' mode or not, Auto ISO locks ISO at 400.
> In A/Tv modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-400, again whether or not flash in 'bounce' mode.
> In P/A+ modes, Auto ISO operates between ISO 100-1600 if flash is in 'bounce' mode; ISO 100-400 if not in 'bounce' mode.
> My head hurts. Anyone want to explain the rationale behind this?


 
Actually, saying 100-400 if flash is not bounced, is not quite correct. It will always set ISO at ISO 400 in all shooting modes and ONLY go down to ISO 100 in order to avoid over-exposure. 

So when ISO 100 would render a perfectly exposed capture with (fill) flash, the cam will still go to ISO 400 in Auto-ISO. This behaviour is unchanged form previous EOS models ... e.g. 5D2 and 7D.


----------



## sarangiman (May 9, 2012)

Oh wow, that's even worse behavior than I thought! Thanks for the clarification. Maybe they think ISO 400 is best b/c it's right around unity gain?


----------



## briansquibb (May 9, 2012)

I shoot in full manual + fec with flash so I am not to sure how disastrous it is


----------



## AvTvM (May 10, 2012)

well ... I guess it would be very naive to expect Canon being able to program meaningful Auto-ISO behaviour for use with flash when they are ot even capable to implement "really right"AUto-ISO without flash ... ;D

But, Auto-ISO With flash is a truly difficult animal ... desirable camera behaviour depends on:

Type of flash used:
* pop-up flash [ok, not on the 5D3 : ] with little power and no possibility to bounce
* speedlite on cam in hot-shoe - direct or bounced
* all sorts of wireless flash use
each type dmands a different approach

Desired balance of ambient adn flash light ... if anyon, then only the photog knows, what he wants in a specific situation. Program-AE (of which Auto-ISO is one emanation) generally try to achieve "even lighting". 

Other than with flashless Auto-ISO, Nikon has also not yet solved AUto-ISO with flash. They changed their programmed model from the D90 onwoards, inclduing D300s, D3s, D5100, D7000 ... BUT they do not even provide the little table plus small-print footnotes Canon includes in their manuals.

That is why the Nikon uiser base is still guessing, what exactly is going on when using AUto-ISO with flash on their cameras ... as can be seen in many confused forum threads on the subject. Canon on the other hand, has taken a completely ludicrous approach, but at least they state in their little table plus small-print footnotes, what hapless measures their cameras will take in the various shooting modes with Auto-ISO and flash active. 

Canon engineers must have come to the conclusion, that ISO 400 maximizes the chance to achieve "even lighting" between ambuient and flash light in most situations - so that's why the just turn the cam to ISO 400.

When an attached flash is bounced, they (correctly) assume, that less flash light arrives on the scene and decided to have the cam go up to ISO1600 ... why only in full Auto-modes (P, A+) but not in Av or TV ... no one knows, they will not talk about it. : 

On the Nikon side, the cam will go up to maximum upper ISO limit as set by user ... using pop-up flash, it will go to shortest X-sync time (in shooting modes where cam determines shutter speed) and then immediately start raising ISO all the way up ... so you have tons of threads, where Nikonians complain, that their cam uses ISO6400 in Auto-ISO any time they use the pop-up flash ... ;-)

It might really be worthwhile to get a group of photographers together to develop a "really right Auto-ISO with and without flash white-paper", then send it to the camera manufacturers telling them to "go and program it, folks"!


----------



## sarangiman (May 10, 2012)

Yeah I don't see myself particularly using Auto ISO with a flash, precisely b/c I want to control background vs. foreground exposure. Can someone paint a scenario where Auto ISO would make sense w/ flash?

Again, I suspect ISO 400 is chosen b/c it's right around unity gain for this camera & the 5D Mark II. For a camera with very low read noise, there'd be very little gain in shooting above unity gain... perhaps one stop above unity gain would still be better than shooting at unity gain & adding 1-stop exposure in post simply because of rounding/quantization errors. But of course, this philosophy is more for a theoretical 'ISO-less' camera, which Canon is far from because of its poor read noise. 

Ironically, the Nikon D800/D7000 are much closer to this theoretical 'ISO-less' camera... hence I'd be much more comfortable just leaving the Nikon at ISO 400, heck ISO 100, using the flash to light my subject, & then pulling up exposure in dark areas in post. I'm scared to do the latter with my Canon, especially my 5D Mark III which shows more (vertical) banding than any of the previous 5D series cameras I've owned.


----------



## AvTvM (May 10, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Yeah I don't see myself particularly using Auto ISO with a flash, precisely b/c I want to control background vs. foreground exposure. Can someone paint a scenario where Auto ISO would make sense w/ flash?



I agree ... Auto-ISO plus flash seems to make sense primarily for those users that want to use a DSLR as "hi-end" P&S camera. "Uncle Charlie with his cam at the wedding reception of his niece" type of scenario ... let the cam do "all the thinking" ... no clue whatsoever regarding balance of ambient/flash light ... and "even lighting" desired by all parties concerned - behind and in front of camera. ;-)

That's probably the reason Canon lets the cam go to ISO1600 with (bounced) flash only in P/A+ shooting modes ... uncle Charlie has learned "from the pro's" that he should not fire the flash straight into people's face at close distance like he did for the first 30 years if his photo-amateur career ... but rather bounce it! ;-) 

btw nothing wrong with that scenario, as fas as I am concerned ... why should a DSLR not be able to also handle this?


----------



## sarangiman (May 10, 2012)

Yeah I'm still learning about Auto ISO. I had no use for it up till now, given the useless implementation of Auto ISO in the 5D Mark II...


----------



## sarangiman (May 10, 2012)

Since I previously commented on the Nikons approaching the theoretical 'ISO-less' camera, I figured I'd report back with a quick test I did.

With the Canon 5D Mark III, b/c of high read noise, it's important to expose the image at the highest ISO that doesn't clip highlights. In fact, I found an ISO 6400 image to be cleaner than an ISO 1600 image, deprived of 2 stops of light, then pushed 2 stops in post.

On the Nikon D7000, an ISO 400 image, deprived 4 stops, then pushed 4 stops in post looks every bit as good as the ISO 6400 shots. Heck, even the ISO 200 image, deprived 5 stops, then pushed 5 stops in post looks almost on par with the ISO 6400 shot. That's how little the electronics/read noise mess with low signals in these EXMOR sensors.

Meanwhile, the Canon 5D Mark III started falling apart at ISO 1600, deprived of 2 stops.

Incredible. Again, given the poor read noise on the Canon 5D series, it really behooves them to implement Auto ISO properly. Correct ISO is clearly much more important to nail on such noisy Canon sensors than it is on the latest Nikons, if you're concerned with image quality that is.


----------



## briansquibb (May 10, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Incredible. Again, given the poor read noise on Canons, it really behooves them to implement Auto ISO properly. Correct ISO is clearly much more important to nail on the Canons than it is on the latest Nikons, if you're concerned with image quality that is.



Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)


----------



## AvTvM (May 10, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)



to the contrary. We have PROVEN in this very thread that ALL Canon DSLRs to date - including the EOS 1D Mk. IV - have Auto-ISO implementations that are way below the current "gold standard" and really leave a lot to be desired ... to say the least.


----------



## briansquibb (May 10, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)
> ...



I have to disagree as the 1D4 has proper auto iso - it was me that proved it did. What you are saying is that you would like the implemention changed which is a subjective view which therefore cannot be proved as it is just an opinion.

And the proof about the read noise of the 1DS3 - which was the top standard when released?


----------



## sarangiman (May 10, 2012)

> Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)



Fair enough Brian, I've modified my statement to talk only of the 5D series.

Although, w/ a read noise of 21.5e- & a sensor very similar to the 5DII on the 1Ds3, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make?


----------



## briansquibb (May 10, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > Please avoid making sweaping statements that dont stand up to examination. Have you evidence of a lot of noise on the 1DS3? .... and we have already shown that the 1D4 has proper auto iso (albeit through a clunky menu)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The 1DS3 read noise is about the same as the D3 showing that not all Canon sensors are that far behind those of Nikon.


----------



## sarangiman (May 10, 2012)

> The 1DS3 read noise is about the same as the D3 showing that not all Canon sensors are that far behind those of Nikon.



That statement doesn't take into account banding & fixed pattern noise, which is actually one of the most offensive qualities of my lower-ISO pushed exposures (the ones that'd have benefitted from a higher ISO) on my 5D Mark III.


----------



## briansquibb (May 10, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > The 1DS3 read noise is about the same as the D3 showing that not all Canon sensors are that far behind those of Nikon.
> 
> 
> 
> That statement doesn't take into account banding & fixed pattern noise, which is actually one of the most offensive qualities of my lower-ISO pushed exposures (the ones that'd have benefitted from a higher ISO) on my 5D Mark III.



I dont get that on the 1DS3 until you get to 3200 (H) Up to iso 800 is clean - but then I dont need to push significantly


----------



## sarangiman (May 10, 2012)

> I dont get that on the 1DS3 until you get to 3200 (H) Up to iso 800 is clean - but then I dont need to push significantly



That's encouraging... though not all models/samples have as much banding as others, in my experience. For example, banding is most offensive on my 5D Mark III, more so than my Mark II or my Mark I. 

I cringe as I ask this, on this forum, but: do you mind posting an ISO 100 black frame shot (lens cap on, 1/8000s, smallest aperture) from your 1Ds3? I'd like to see its read noise characteristics.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## briansquibb (May 10, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > I dont get that on the 1DS3 until you get to 3200 (H) Up to iso 800 is clean - but then I dont need to push significantly
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Here is the RAW file 

www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/IMG_7603.CR2


----------



## revup67 (May 10, 2012)

Sorry if I am jumping in late and I am not sure if anyone has discussed this within all 10 pages (my 5D MK iii will be here Monday), but the work around I use on the 7D is this: while in Manual Mode I can select the shutter, F stop and ISO such as 100. I then pull up the Menu and on screen 2 go to Expo. comp/AEB. There I can bracket any EC I want. Sure, I wind up with 3 images but that is OK since we don't know in advance what the outcome is going to be in case I screw up. I can set them 1/3 apart or 3 stops apart. I put camera in High Continuous mode and problem is solved. Note, while in M mode, you can also scroll through the M-Fn wheel and make these settings as well. Best of all worlds.

I hope this helps solve the issue.


----------



## sarangiman (May 10, 2012)

> Here is the RAW file
> 
> www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/IMG_7603.CR2



Thanks Brian! Unfortunately, it says I don't have access to this item...


----------



## bloodstupid (May 11, 2012)

revup67 said:


> Sorry if I am jumping in late and I am not sure if anyone has discussed this within all 10 pages (my 5D MK iii will be here Monday), but the work around I use on the 7D is this: while in Manual Mode I can select the shutter, F stop and ISO such as 100. I then pull up the Menu and on screen 2 go to Expo. comp/AEB. There I can bracket any EC I want. Sure, I wind up with 3 images but that is OK since we don't know in advance what the outcome is going to be in case I screw up. I can set them 1/3 apart or 3 stops apart. I put camera in High Continuous mode and problem is solved. Note, while in M mode, you can also scroll through the M-Fn wheel and make these settings as well. Best of all worlds.
> 
> I hope this helps solve the issue.



Bracketing for action shots? Sure.  If there would be enough time i could set ISO manually. But there isnt.


----------



## briansquibb (May 11, 2012)

revup67 said:


> Sorry if I am jumping in late and I am not sure if anyone has discussed this within all 10 pages (my 5D MK iii will be here Monday), but the work around I use on the 7D is this: while in Manual Mode I can select the shutter, F stop and ISO such as 100. I then pull up the Menu and on screen 2 go to Expo. comp/AEB. There I can bracket any EC I want. Sure, I wind up with 3 images but that is OK since we don't know in advance what the outcome is going to be in case I screw up. I can set them 1/3 apart or 3 stops apart. I put camera in High Continuous mode and problem is solved. Note, while in M mode, you can also scroll through the M-Fn wheel and make these settings as well. Best of all worlds.
> 
> I hope this helps solve the issue.



Does this work with auto iso as well?


----------



## Speed (May 12, 2012)

revup67 said:


> Sorry if I am jumping in late and I am not sure if anyone has discussed this within all 10 pages...............................I hope this helps solve the issue.



Sorry but I can't workout how bracketing solves an auto iso issue for shooting birds or sports, at all.


----------



## bloodstupid (May 31, 2012)

BTW compensating with M sucks big time, always having to watch that you dont overexpose, not the reason to use an automatic mode if you stil lhave to check and adjust paramerters.


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

bloodstupid said:


> BTW compensating with M sucks big time, always having to watch that you dont overexpose, not the reason to use an automatic mode if you stil lhave to check and adjust paramerters.



With AutoIso that is less of a problem


----------



## bloodstupid (May 31, 2012)

With AutoISO this *exactly* is the problem! What should the camera do if it reaches ISO 100? I can only overexpuse. Sure in AV it would use a faster time. But there is the stupid 1/250 limit which make that useless and to slow in the beginning.


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

bloodstupid said:


> With AutoISO this *exactly* is the problem! What should the camera do if it reaches ISO 100? I can only overexpuse. Sure in AV it would use a faster time. But there is the stupid 1/250 limit which make that useless and to slow in the beginning.



On the 1D4 the shutter speed gets faster - isn't is the same on the 5DIII?


----------



## bloodstupid (May 31, 2012)

No its not, as mentioned before the 5D series has no SafetyShift in M. Sadly.


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

bloodstupid said:


> No its not, as mentioned before the 5D series has no SafetyShift in M. Sadly.



Safety shift in Av


----------



## bloodstupid (May 31, 2012)

Oh come on, read what this is about, AV is unusable in certain situations because of the 1/250 limit.


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

bloodstupid said:


> Oh come on, read what this is about, AV is unusable in certain situations because of the 1/250 limit.



That is the minimum - you were asking about what happens if the iso gets to 100 - and the answer is the shutter speed increases.

If you read the whole thread you will have spotted that only the 1 series has the full limit on the shutter speed. I dont see any need to go through that debate again. Simply if you want the full function of the autoiso then the 1 series is the way to go, including ec as well

If you want full iso and can manage without camera ec then the 5DIII works fine in M mode. If you set the minimum speed too low then you will get over exposure as you said. So set the shutter speed so you are at iso400 most of the time and gives yourself two stops.

How difficult can it be?


----------



## AvTvM (May 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> ...
> If you read the whole thread you will have spotted that only the 1 series has the full limit on the shutter speed. I dont see any need to go through that debate again. Simply if you want the full function of the autoiso then the 1 series is the way to go, including ec as well
> ...
> How difficult can it be?



Exactly ... how difficult can it be for Canon to finally implement a fully working Auto-ISO model in all of its DSLRs, or at the very least in those models which are targeted at pro and enthusiast target groups and priced accordingly. 

"just go buy a 1 series" is a typical answer I'd expect to hear from die-hard Canon fanboys or paid PR forum posters. 

It is no SOLUTION whatsoever, as Canon's Auto-ISO feature even in the 1 series is not fully functional (as demonstrated earlier in this thread - e.g. it does not take into account focal length of lens attached) and is sub-par to what Nikon offers in the much less expensive, "second-tier" Nikon D800. 

The 1/250s limit on the 5D III can only be rated as an act of "provocant, in-your-face marketing differentiation" by Canon. There is simply no other reason to explain this severe and mindless limitation.

So the only sensible course of action for people owning a 5D 3 or being interested to buy one is creating enough continued "noise" on the net to wake up Canon and have them implement this feature via a simple and dirt-cheap firmware update ... ASAP!

And no, I will NOT buy a Canon 1 series when all I want is a firmware upgrade to get state-of-the art Auto-ISO on my 7D too.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 31, 2012)

I could write an algorithm (used to be a programmer) which would be the be all and end all for auto ISO. It would do everything everyone wanted and take care of all of the situations that it needed to. It would take me about 15 minutes (although coding much longer of course).

Canon chose not to do that with their implementation of auto ISO and it remains, along with the viewfinder red/black points issues, the only two disappointments with the camera.

I can't decide whether it's that they don't see it as a useful feature or if they want to keep it away from the 5d3.

I'll be honest - if this camera had a really good auto ISO I'd probably buy another one and retire my 5d2 entirely. I love the fact that all I need to worry about is EC. It's great!! However, it "only just" works in that, when I switch from my 50L to my 135L, I need to remember to set the shutter speed minimum and sometimes I forget. What's wrong with having settings per lens? What's wrong with having an option to override the settings you've put in the camera and using a shutter speed more relevant? I just don't get how hard it can be and it could be an AWESOME feature. I could spend SO much of my day on auto ISO if the feature was correctly implemented


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> Exactly ... how difficult can it be for Canon to finally implement a fully working Auto-ISO model in all of its DSLRs, or at the very least in those models which are targeted at pro and enthusiast target groups and priced accordingly.



I think it's been pretty well established that there's no significant _technical_ difficulty to implement this in all bodies down to the T3/1100D. The fact that they haven't done so indicates that they have other reasons for not doing so. 

So, it's time to stop




.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

yawn... shot several paid shoots so far with the 5d3, a few using auto iso.... no problems so far... got my min shutter set to 125 when using my 24-105, and auto iso does the rest. but just think of it, seriously, 10 years ago there was no auto iso, you had to dial it in, use an external meter because in camera meters, if any, were crap, and even with that, you would buy a brick of film, waste the first roll of the brick testing it so you can dial in exactly how it will expose with your meter, and compensate from there... gasp... whatever did we do? Going between indoor and outdoor scenes... you had to gasp, use more light, waste the rest of the roll to change film, or if you were the bomb, you kept notes on how far you were so when you went back to a roll you can auto advance by manually shooting blanks to get back to where you were without wasting rolls. Dont get me wrong, I appreciate auto ISO, but i'm not going to blame it if i miss an exposure, afterall it is picking up after my lazy butt because i chose not to crunch the math and do it myself. Also about the black dots, i offered a workaround for low light situations and black dots on the other thread but no one bothered to check it out. Bright sunlight doesn't show the red confirmation, but if you cant see the dots in bright light, you need your eyes checked.


----------



## bloodstupid (May 31, 2012)

Some more years ago movies had not color and sound..some more, people made paintings...who cares what was.

Real fixes are always better than workarounds. Sure you can press 2 buttons for focusing to have it illuminated before AF start...but with the MII it was all in one button. BTW the problem with the non-illuminated AF points occurs when its dark. And this is the AutoISO wish thread.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

bloodstupid said:


> Some more years ago movies had not color and sound..some more, people made paintings...who cares what was.
> 
> Real fixes are always better than workarounds. Sure you can press 2 buttons for focusing to have it illuminated before AF start...but with the MII it was all in one button. BTW the problem with the non-illuminated AF points occurs when its dark. And this is the AutoISO wish thread.



and yet the 7d has been around nearly as long and no one had any issues until now?


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

bloodstupid said:


> Some more years ago movies had not color and sound..some more, people made paintings...who cares what was.
> 
> Real fixes are always better than workarounds. Sure you can press 2 buttons for focusing to have it illuminated before AF start...but with the MII it was all in one button. BTW the problem with the non-illuminated AF points occurs when its dark. And this is the AutoISO wish thread.



And since you brought up the 5d2, how did that AF work for ya? I'd rather take all the benefits of the AF/level, ability to turn points on and off from view, etc than worry about dots that illuminate as you move your points on the one touch application to track moving subjects... cant believe all the griping people do over the silliest things...


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 31, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> yawn... shot several paid shoots so far with the 5d3, a few using auto iso.... no problems so far... got my min shutter set to 125 when using my 24-105, and auto iso does the rest. but just think of it, seriously, 10 years ago there was no auto iso, you had to dial it in, use an external meter because in camera meters, if any, were crap, and even with that, you would buy a brick of film, waste the first roll of the brick testing it so you can dial in exactly how it will expose with your meter, and compensate from there... gasp... whatever did we do? Going between indoor and outdoor scenes... you had to gasp, use more light, waste the rest of the roll to change film, or if you were the bomb, you kept notes on how far you were so when you went back to a roll you can auto advance by manually shooting blanks to get back to where you were without wasting rolls. Dont get me wrong, I appreciate auto ISO, but i'm not going to blame it if i miss an exposure, afterall it is picking up after my lazy butt because i chose not to crunch the math and do it myself.



I think this is missing the point. We can all take well exposed shots. We can all use a lightmeter. What we did was limit photography to those situations where we could take the photograph. Using manual methods, if I swing round and see a shot that I want and it's outdoors and I'm indoors, I physically won't have time to take the shot using the minimum ISO I could - or maybe even not at all if I hit 1/8000th.

I could easily go back to a 20 year way of shooting and my work would suffer for it. I'd rather move my photography onwards and expand my creative options as I go. 100 years ago people took 5 photos at a wedding and everyone had to stay very still. We don't want to move back to those times either. Computers are good at calculating things if the producers of technology see the opportunity it offers.

Auto ISO (if correctly implemented) does offer new opportunities. It gives you the option of taking shots you couldn't otherwise, as have many of the other technological advances.

"whatever did we do?" - we took a shot which isn't as good as the shot we could have taken today or we missed the opportunity. And it's not laziness - it's actually creativity and a desire to produce better work which drives this technology ... at least for me. It can do something in 1/1000th of a second which would take me *at least* 2 seconds to achieve and those 2 seconds matter sometimes.

Also, 1/125th isn't suitable for everyone - that's barely adequate for my 135f2 so now I have to go to 1/250th whereas 1/160th would be fine.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

*OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



PhilDrinkwater said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > yawn... shot several paid shoots so far with the 5d3, a few using auto iso.... no problems so far... got my min shutter set to 125 when using my 24-105, and auto iso does the rest. but just think of it, seriously, 10 years ago there was no auto iso, you had to dial it in, use an external meter because in camera meters, if any, were crap, and even with that, you would buy a brick of film, waste the first roll of the brick testing it so you can dial in exactly how it will expose with your meter, and compensate from there... gasp... whatever did we do? Going between indoor and outdoor scenes... you had to gasp, use more light, waste the rest of the roll to change film, or if you were the bomb, you kept notes on how far you were so when you went back to a roll you can auto advance by manually shooting blanks to get back to where you were without wasting rolls. Dont get me wrong, I appreciate auto ISO, but i'm not going to blame it if i miss an exposure, afterall it is picking up after my lazy butt because i chose not to crunch the math and do it myself.
> ...



Phil, I get your point and i'm all about innovation, or i wouldn't have gotten to where i am. You have auto ISO, you have a minimum shutter speed you can set and the camera will abide by as long as it can get an accurate exposure, but in the end it is not a mind reader... For what i'm concerned, the camera can do so much, it can calculate the exposure, calculate exposure based on the parameters of the min shutter THAT YOU SET, and there you go... unless you are shooting 400mm lenses or bigger and or teleconverters, the 1/250 minimum is plenty adequate unless you are shooting some oddball thing like races or whatever... then in those situations where shutter is important, one click from AV to TV solves the shutter requirement issues. This thread can be retitled.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 31, 2012)

*Re: OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



awinphoto said:


> For what i'm concerned, the camera can do so much, it can calculate the exposure, calculate exposure based on the parameters of the min shutter THAT YOU SET, and there you go...



I guess my background (which is a lot about usability) has made me look deeper for the ways that systems can help.. whether others want to use them is up to them, but I can guarantee that I could spec a system which would help some users much more than the current system.

It feels like the old "programmer spends 90% of the time making a system and then 10% of the time making it usable".

If Canon asked their customers what they want or took notice of feedback (I sent in feedback 3 years ago when I got my 5d2) then this thread and all of the other 5d3 auto ISO threads wouldn't exist.

For me, it's not a lesson for the users in how to live within what we're given, but for manufacturers to listen to their customers needs and satisfy them, especially in the face of competition (not just Nikon) which seems to have got it right.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

*Re: OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



PhilDrinkwater said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > For what i'm concerned, the camera can do so much, it can calculate the exposure, calculate exposure based on the parameters of the min shutter THAT YOU SET, and there you go...
> ...



It could be said that canon did listen to their customers... people wanted better ISO, canon gave it to them, people wanted much better AF, they gave them the best AF they have, people wanted more customization, no more MP, 100% VF, people wanted horizon level, people wanted weathersealing, people wanted more usability, canon gave them all of that and then some. Canon gave everything people wanted yet people still aren't happy, ad regarding the feedback, give feedback, but all the gripes are about new features, the new AF, the new implementation of the auto ISO... in the last, lets say 4 years, that i've even dared to use auto iso, because before that, with the 30d and such, ISO was so awful you didn't WANT your camera to bump up past ISO 1000 if you can help it. Now it isn't as much as issue. But in that time, I would guess auto ISO maybe cost me a handful, ok, maybe a dozen images total because shutter was too slow for the scene, but in the end, I take responsibility for not having the camera in full manual or Tv to make sure that wasn't an issue. Then again how I shoot isn't the same as you, so...


----------



## AvTvM (May 31, 2012)

*Re: OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



PhilDrinkwater said:


> For me, it's not a lesson for the users in how to live within what we're given, but for manufacturers to listen to their customers needs and satisfy them, especially in the face of competition (not just Nikon) which seems to have got it right.



+1 ... exactly! 

It took Nikon also a long time to get to the "almost right" D800 version of Auto-ISO... users cannot set their own "rules" to balance the 3 parameters as desired. But even then it is 2 steps ahead in functionality of Canon and it has a way better user interface for Auto-ISO than Canon (including 1 series cameras) ... looking at the menus shows this very nicely. This came as a bit of a surprise to me, because in general I consider Canon's UI to be superior to Nikon's ... e.g. interms of "3 full custom setups" (Canon, except most 1 series cams) vs. "2 separate parameter banks" (all Nikon).


----------



## bloodstupid (May 31, 2012)

*Re: OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



awinphoto said:


> .. then in those situations where shutter is important, one click from AV to TV solves the shutter requirement issues. This thread can be retitled.



Yes if you have a screwdriver and glue so you can open up the lens and fix the aperture you want to shoot it in..


----------



## TotoEC (May 31, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> yawn... _[snip] [snip], _ seriously, 10 years ago there was no auto iso, you had to dial it in, use an external meter because in camera meters, if any, were crap, and even with that, you would buy a brick of film, waste the first roll of the brick testing it so you can dial in exactly how it will expose with your meter, and compensate from there... gasp... whatever did we do? Going between indoor and outdoor scenes... you had to gasp, use more light, waste the rest of the roll to change film, or if you were the bomb, you kept notes on how far you were so when you went back to a roll you can auto advance by manually shooting blanks to get back to where you were without wasting rolls. . ._[snip]_ . .



People should be thankful and appreciative of what they have now - AutoISO.

How many members in this forum know anything about the F16 Rule? and no, that's not the jetplane!


----------



## AvTvM (May 31, 2012)

TotoEC said:


> People should be thankful and appreciative of what they have now - AutoISO.



no, I am not at all thankful for semi- or non-functional features in my cameras and I will never be. 

My 7D has an Auto-ISO feature but it sucks so much, that I cannot use it at all. 5D 2 is even worse and 5D 3 is only somewhat better. I am paying full price for my cameras and I want them with fully functional photographic features, especially with those which really help me getting better pictures and/or getting them more easily.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

*Re: OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



bloodstupid said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > .. then in those situations where shutter is important, one click from AV to TV solves the shutter requirement issues. This thread can be retitled.
> ...



Well a tip from one professional to another, if you shoot on P or that shiney green box setting it will do all the guess work for ya! how bout that? a mind reading camera... we photographers have gotten spoiled... the difficulty, the discipline needed to be a professional has gone by the wayside and whats left? People who want the camera to do it all for them and all they have to do is click a button. It's a sad reality we live in.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> TotoEC said:
> 
> 
> > People should be thankful and appreciative of what they have now - AutoISO.
> ...



I've read your bitching and whining for the last 3 months... jump over to nikon, get over yourself. We get that you dont like canon right now or the 5d3... dont buy it... i'm sure canon will be crying over your lost business.


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

If you really need autoiso buy a 1 series . I have and I use it by default, works perfectly and gives me ec for fine tuning.

I suppose you my say that this should come as default like it does in the D800 - to which I would say why doesn't the D800 give me 10fps. We could carry on forever that way.

The 5DIII has a limited AutoIso
The 1 series has the full AutoIso

Just buy the camera that suits you best and stop whining


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2012)

TotoEC said:


> How many members in this forum know anything about the F16 Rule?



But that only applies to the archaic medium of film, right? 



awinphoto said:


> I've read your bitching and whining for the last 3 months... jump over to nikon, get over yourself. We get that you dont like canon right now or the 5d3... dont buy it... i'm sure canon will be crying over your lost business.



It's been suggested.  He's already indicated that when (translation = IF, a big IF) he goes FF, he'll be switching to Nikon. At that point, I hope the whining about inadequate features and other issues will move to another forum...


----------



## Razor2012 (May 31, 2012)

Wouldn't it be better if someone really likes another brand, just join their forum and praise it rather than sit here and b***h? It's like staying in a relationship that really sucks...or you can do something about it to make things better. That way we don't have to listen to it, lol. Life is too short.


----------



## bloodstupid (May 31, 2012)

Stop complaining about us complaining and go write canon and chuck westfall to make the world better...

This is not about liking a brand...its just a firm that produces tools, why should one be emotional about that. We just want them to improve and think their features through.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> If you really need autoiso buy a 1 series . I have and I use it by default, works perfectly and gives me ec for fine tuning.
> 
> I suppose you my say that this should come as default like it does in the D800 - to which I would say why doesn't the D800 give me 10fps. We could carry on forever that way.
> 
> ...



What about this little problem: I can afford a 1 series but it's too loud in church for my preference. What do I do then? Suddenly, because someone decided to leave out a few thousand $ of software deliberately I cannot have the camera I would like. 

Both the 5d and 1d are pro cameras. Canon need to learn that.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 31, 2012)

Forget it..


----------



## aznable (May 31, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> I've read your bitching and whining for the last 3 months... jump over to nikon, get over yourself. We get that you dont like canon right now or the 5d3... dont buy it... i'm sure canon will be crying over your lost business.



nahhh...he would start taking some photos to change and improve his technique


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> To be honest I'm disappointed about the attitude here. We aren't talking about a light leak which affects virtually no one ever - we're talking about a feature which is still not right in *3* generations of cameras.
> 
> I'm not talking about sending my camera back, switching brands or even moaning if canon made me pay for it: but this is an important feature for me, a 1d is too loud and I don't want to switch brands.
> 
> By moaning, maybe someone will notice and give me what *i* want in the camera considering its just a firmware tweak?



Assuming it is just a firmware tweak, and I think you said you can do that in a few minutes or so... why dont you email canon and while you are at it, send them your resume.... surely what canon needs is forward thinking and innovation that they lack... Now let me climb off my soap box and say still I dont think i've missed more than a dozen images ever because of auto ISO... But then I dont let the camera try to read my mind... If the aperture and shutter speed is important, shoot in manual with auto ISO and it gets me there. Also i'm not too proud to admit that it is a crutch and basically filling in when I'm too lazy to work out the proper exposure properly manually. There used to be a time when outdoors i could just look at an outdoors scene, and going off of sunny 16 and compensating for clouds, for shade, for whatever the scene was experiencing and be able to nail exposure within a 1/3 of a stop but even I admit that the camera meters are getting good enough where I can trust that and not use my brain to do the equations. We have gotten lazy as photographers in this sense and this whole thread proves it to a T.


----------



## AvTvM (May 31, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> We have gotten lazy as photographers in this sense and this whole thread proves it to a T.



Well, that is one narrow way to look at it. I have situations, where I got all the time at hand to set everything up peacefully and figure out all exposure parameters myself or at least without using Auto-ISO. If taht is all you do, and you don't need it, just don't ever switch the camera into Auto-ISO. 

However, I have aother situations too, were the light is constanly changing and there is a flurry of action around me and were I DO want the camera to take care of most if not all "technical aspects" of photography .. superb autofocus to instantly nail focus , smart metering to determine suitable exposure settings, and automatic modes that intelligently control and balance all three exposure relevant parameters ... most important aperture, then time, then ISO (kee it as low as possible within the framewrok of the other two paramters). I am FULLY occupied with anticipating whats happening, seeing it happen, framing it in the best possible way and following the action. 

I don't care, if a landscape photographer calls this "lazy" or not. I want it that way. I pay for it. I want it fully funtioniong. ANd I am not going to spend 4k or 6k for a 1 series camera just to get a firmware feature that cCanon is withholding from its cliebnts who are buying "lesser" cameras. And even worse, Canon does not even manage to implement the feature really right in its flagship DSLRs. 

As long as I am a paying Canon customer I will continue to criticize this ... until Canon finally puts it right. 
So Canon employees, Canon fanboys and "HCB and Ansel Adams had no Auto-ISO"-old-schoolers ... brace yourself, but don't hold your breath.


----------



## zim (May 31, 2012)

I’m really finding this Auto-ISO thing confusing so I have to admit I don’t use it. If in M mode Auto-ISO is fixed at 400 for some reason (500D), what’s ‘auto’ about that? In Av mode I fix f-stop, camera works out shutter speed for selected ISO but if in Av with Auto-ISO it does some kind of black magic to balance two variables instead of one? that just sounds like loosing control? What seems missing to me is some kind of ‘Iv’ mode where given two fixed settings f-stop and shutter speed the camera calculates ISO whatever that value turns out to be. All exposure compensation and bracketing functions would therefore work as other modes. Isn’t an Iv mode a logical extension of digital especially now that the higher ISO ratings are getting so good?


----------



## meli (May 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> If you really need autoiso buy a 1 series . I have and I use it by default, works perfectly and gives me ec for fine tuning.
> 
> I suppose you my say that this should come as default like it does in the D800 - to which I would say why doesn't the D800 give me 10fps. We could carry on forever that way.
> 
> ...



Its a valid whining, 10fps is a hardware issue and one expects to pay the premium; deliberately crippling software you already have to make it unusable is just ridiculous.




awinphoto said:


> Assuming it is just a firmware tweak, and I think you said you can do that in a few minutes or so... why dont you email canon and while you are at it, send them your resume.... surely what canon needs is forward thinking and innovation that they lack...



Yes surely, cause Canon has a trackrecord of incorporating user tweaks, ML for example, or i remember couple of years ago a hacked 400d (400d!) with features ranging from intervalometer to motion sensing.

And maybe a rebel model doesnt really need bells & whistles to sell, but 5d could take advantage of soft tweaks & it would be really cheap for Canon to do so, but no..., well they cheaped out the few pennies for a usb3 controller cant really see them try that hard for the rest...


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > If you really need autoiso buy a 1 series . I have and I use it by default, works perfectly and gives me ec for fine tuning.
> ...



Let me think - did the 5DII have AutoIso?
Did the pros take good wedding photos?

No and yes - and you cant do it without AutoIso - says a lot about your ability

Even I managaged it as an amateur with a 5DII - makes you technically incompetant then I guess. 

I suggest you go back to using P mode when it will all be taken care of for you


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

zim said:


> I’m really finding this Auto-ISO thing confusing so I have to admit I don’t use it. If in M mode Auto-ISO is fixed at 400 for some reason (500D), what’s ‘auto’ about that? In Av mode I fix f-stop, camera works out shutter speed for selected ISO but if in Av with Auto-ISO it does some kind of black magic to balance two variables instead of one? that just sounds like loosing control? What seems missing to me is some kind of ‘Iv’ mode where given two fixed settings f-stop and shutter speed the camera calculates ISO whatever that value turns out to be. All exposure compensation and bracketing functions would therefore work as other modes. Isn’t an Iv mode a logical extension of digital especially now that the higher ISO ratings are getting so good?



Auto ISO in the 7d and 5d3 works properly in all modes including M. the 5d2 and other xxd and xxxd cameras had the iso on manual locked at 400 for auto. When used in Av/ Tv/ and now M in the 7d and 5d3 plus 1 series, it tries to get correct exposures natively in the lowest ISO's possible but if it deems it too slow or to low light, it will jack your ISO's up until it can get a decent handholding exposure... decent being the key word. On the 5d3 you can set the minimum shutter speed so if in Av, you set f4 or whatever you want, and the camera will try not to go below your set minimum shutter unless it's maxed out at ISO and it's still to dark. Some people want faster minimum shutter speeds, which on the 5d3 is set at 1/250 and slower. But that's the crux of the griping on this thread.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > We have gotten lazy as photographers in this sense and this whole thread proves it to a T.
> ...



narrow or not narrow, we are griping about an auto function!!! If I'm the only one that see's the irony in that, then god help this forum. I use auto ISO every few days when i'm out and about shooting for commercial mortgage companies, one of my bigger clients... Going inside, outside, here, there, everywhere around the properties they own notes for, it's easier to let the camera do the heavy lifting there... but in the end of the day, from the 10D and 30D days where my camera was full manual everything to now, I make sure I know my camera intimately, I dont blame my gear if I miss a shot (with the exception of the 5d2's horrid AF), and I improve myself to make sure my gear and I get the best results for my clients. If the 1d series had software where it could read your eye, read your brain, and pump out award winning shots click after click, as far as I'm concerned with the gear I have, it doesn't phase me a bit. If nikon has "fully functioning auto iso" whooptie freaking doo. Auto ISO has never slowed me down in the past so what do I care if there's a better version out there. Evolve as a photographer, save up and buy better gear, or quit your whining because if I have to listen to this drivel for the next 2 and a half years so help me god.


----------



## zim (May 31, 2012)

Thanks awinphoto, I actually understood that! ;D
So what I was describing was actually off topic, apologies for that.


----------



## awinphoto (May 31, 2012)

zim said:


> Thanks awinphoto, I actually understood that! ;D
> So what I was describing was actually off topic, apologies for that.



No prob... glad to help


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

zim said:


> I’m really finding this Auto-ISO thing confusing so I have to admit I don’t use it. If in M mode Auto-ISO is fixed at 400 for some reason (500D), what’s ‘auto’ about that? In Av mode I fix f-stop, camera works out shutter speed for selected ISO but if in Av with Auto-ISO it does some kind of black magic to balance two variables instead of one? that just sounds like loosing control? What seems missing to me is some kind of ‘Iv’ mode where given two fixed settings f-stop and shutter speed the camera calculates ISO whatever that value turns out to be. All exposure compensation and bracketing functions would therefore work as other modes. Isn’t an Iv mode a logical extension of digital especially now that the higher ISO ratings are getting so good?



In AV mode the 1 series allows you set the aperture and the minimum shutter speed(without the 1/250 restriction as in the 5DIII). As ISO is automatic, it adjusts the iso correct to get the correct exposure. If the ISO is calculated to be less than ISO 100 then the camera increases the shutter speed so the ISO goes to 100 or above. If the ISO is calculated to be 12800 or above then it slows the shutter speed even if that means the shutter speed goes below the minimum. As the camera is in AV mode then exposure compensation is also available for fine tuning.

The ISO 100 and ISO 12800 are the default ISO minimum and maximum - which are also configurable to, say ISO 200 and ISO 1600.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (Jun 1, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> PhilDrinkwater said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Excuse ME! What an incredibly rude thing to say! As a pro I want to continue to improve my work. And when did I say I can't do without it? Please dont put words into my mouth. 

Some people seem to believe there is a correlation between the quality of ones work and the mode used to capture it. You are clearly one of them. A little education for you: there isn't. Any one can expose an image - that I learned in an afternoon - but getting the best from people takes skill, personality and - above all - concentrating on the couple. By using auto tools I get this. 

If you didn't understand this, all you had to do was ask. Instead you come out and accuse me of incompetency?

Feel free to click my links below to see my work. No flies on me. How about yourself?

And one of the Uks top paid photographers uses p mode so clearly you don't know what's important in wedding photography. Maybe stick to things you know about huh?

I'm out of here. I'm sorry to say that I didn't come onto this board to be publically accused of incompetency.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 1, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> > I suggest you go back to using P mode when it will all be taken care of for you
> 
> 
> 
> Excuse ME! What an incredibly rude thing to say!






PhilDrinkwater said:


> And one of the Uks top paid photographers uses p mode so clearly you don't know what's important in wedding photography. Maybe stick to things you know about huh?



I can't win here - I am being rude suggesting you use P mode and then you tell me that one of the Uks top paid photographers uses p mode, and then tell me that I dont know whats important in wedding photography.

So I suggest doing what one of the Uks top paid photographers does and you tell me to stick to things I know about.

So is one of the Uks top paid photographers wrong then? Or are you just looking to insult me?


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 1, 2012)

It is a shame this thread has gotten so out of hand! 

We may have different opinions regarding use and usefulness of Auto-ISO per se and more specifically regarding Canon's implementations in the 5D 3 and other DSLRs. And we may state facts and opinions quite strongly and have a heated debate at times. That's certainly ok with me.

But I find it definitely uncalled for and totally unacceptable to insult a very civil and knowlegdable forum member by calling him "incompentent as a photographer". I very much regret PhilDrinkwater's decision to leave the forum, but I can fully understand him. He has deserved a full und unequivocal apology - even if he may not ever read it any more.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 1, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> But I find it definitely uncalled for and totally unacceptable to insult a very civil and knowlegdable forum member by calling him "incompentent as a photographer".



I suggest you read the thread more carefully

I have suffered a morning of abuse and accusation by people that do not read threads carefully and accurately and then twist the words out of context into something that wasn't said.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2012)

Sorry, Brian - as much as I generally disagree with AvTvM, I have to say that I don't think there's any way to interpret:



briansquibb said:


> Even I managaged it as an amateur with a 5DII - makes you technically incompetant then I guess.



...as anything other than rude and insulting (not to mention unwarranted).


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 1, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sorry, Brian - as much as I generally disagree with AvTvM, I have to say that I don't think there's any way to interpret:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My apologies - this remark was out of order.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 2, 2012)

*Re: OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



awinphoto said:


> Phil, I get your point and i'm all about innovation, or i wouldn't have gotten to where i am. You have auto ISO, you have a minimum shutter speed you can set and the camera will abide by as long as it can get an accurate exposure, but in the end it is not a mind reader... For what i'm concerned, the camera can do so much, it can calculate the exposure, calculate exposure based on the parameters of the min shutter THAT YOU SET, and there you go... unless you are shooting 400mm lenses or bigger and or teleconverters, the 1/250 minimum is plenty adequate unless you are shooting some oddball thing like races or whatever... then in those situations where shutter is important, one click from AV to TV solves the shutter requirement issues. This thread can be retitled.



The whole point of AutoISO other than a few who want it just for pure convenience is to switch things when thigns are going on too fast to do things yourself and in those scenarios 1/250th is usually frightfully too slow. Wayyy slow for wildlife or sports.

And what are you defending it for? It's like a single byte of code difference would fix it and every other manufacturer gets it right and puts in at all tiers top to BOTTOM.

Again autoiso is hardly an end of the world thing, but what on earth is wrong with Canon marketing? Why cripple such a little thing for no reason when all it does is erode customer loyalty. That is one and only thing Canon gets out of doing it.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 2, 2012)

*Re: OMG the camera cannot read my mind! WTF*



awinphoto said:


> bloodstupid said:
> 
> 
> > awinphoto said:
> ...



What on earth are you going on about? What does P mode or the camera solves everything for you have to do with anything under discussion here?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 2, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> PhilDrinkwater said:
> 
> 
> > To be honest I'm disappointed about the attitude here. We aren't talking about a light leak which affects virtually no one ever - we're talking about a feature which is still not right in *3* generations of cameras.
> ...



Of course it's just a couple byte tweak, all it has is some code that stores the limit as 1/250th when it could store it the limit as say 1/2000th, all you do is change the list of options it offers you and add a few more numbers to the list. It probably would take them about 1 minutes of coding to fix. Adding EC in M AutoISO might take a bit more, but likely not much, unless the camera has some sort of mode/dial based interrupt system and they have it set up in some messy way, then it might become a little involved.


----------

