Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Shooting Epic @ 80 ISO??

Huge mistake. Buy or rent some NDs. Your job is to stop someone from making this monumental error. Or have them call me.

Jim

Von Thomas said:
Is there any adverse effects when shooting Epic or MX at 80 ISO? Client has no ND's, and wants to keep focus REAL shallow.

Von
Click to expand...
 
Brook Willard said:
In my opinion the camera shouldn't even have ISO settings below 640 or maybe 500.
Click to expand...

Agreed.


With quesions like this coming up every week on Reduser, IMHO there should at least be a warning message that comes up on screen when a low ISO is selected:
"WARNING. Check for highlight clipping on RAW data when using ISO below 800"...

It would reduce the number of questions, and tears.

I shouldn't be saying this, but if you know what you're doing, and the contrast of the scene is low, there may be a benefit.
I once shot a very foggy lake scene which was all mid-tones. (Febuary 2008 build, M sensor).
Low ISO help reduce noise, that can become visible in any picture that doesn't have large tonal range.
It's a rare situation, though.
 
I shoot quite comfortably at 320 asa, very single job. (unless dark), I never ever look at histograms either.. I never have a single issue.
Am I doing something wrong?. Is there a reason or benefit to going to 800 asa in the middle of the day? . Is that more as a backup plan just incase you do over expose and you have a stop up your sleeve to save your self.
When I go into raw preview, it looks like when you scroll though in and out of RECOLOR and RAW that 320 is still the base.
Correct me if I'm wrong please. Anyone.?

Like many people, shooting with multi layers of glass filtration is a real annoyance with filter flare, filter bounce, NR issues, (with ring filters you get nipping of the corners etc etc..) and the struggle to get your f-stop to 1.3 in the middle of the day is a real chore sometimes.
I wish filter manufactures made 1.6, 1.9 and 2.2's... even darker now that all these sensitive chips are 320 asa upwards.

Hey Jim, is there money in filters, I'm sure you have looked at it.
Imagine that, RED FILTERS going into your RED MATTBOX.... not a silly thought.

Anyway, that's the challenges of cinematography and thats what makes it so interesting... :)
 
General advice: As long as you're not clipping, low ISO is fine. I'd not advise dropping below 320 though. It gets easier and easier to clip in the highlights (in terms of less headroom above mid grey) the lower you go in ISO. If you want to shoot low ISO, be very careful with highlights and use the highlight exposure check mode.

Specific advice: get some NDs.

Graeme
 
You can get away with ISO 320 if you know what you are doing... no problem for many things. But ISO 80 is a mistake. I'm sure someone can find an exception... but many more will screw up their footage with this setting.

Jim

Mark Toia said:
I shoot quite comfortably at 320iso, very single job. (unless dark) I never ever look at histograms either.. I never have a single issue.
Am I doing something wrong?

Like many people, shooting with layers of glass is a real annoyance with filter flare, filter bounce, NR issues, and the struggle to get your f-stop to 1.3 in the middle of the day is a really chore sometimes.
I wish filter manufactures made 1.6, 1.9 and 2.2's... even darker.
Hey Jim, is there money in filters, I'm sure you have looked at it.
Imagine that, RED FILTERS going into your RED MATTBOX.... not a silly thought.

Anyway, that's the challenges of cinematography and thats what makes it so interesting... :)
Click to expand...
 
Jannard said:
You can get away with ISO 320 if you know what you are doing... no problem for many things. But ISO 80 is a mistake. I'm sure someone can find an exception... but many more will screw up their footage with this setting.

Jim
Click to expand...

Jim,

I hear you loud and clear, I warned them, and they did this while I was backing up data (off set), and I did not know UNTIL I got the next SSD card. That said, the footage looks good, really good, and I'll post a still shortly. I've been doing digital capture for over 13 years, and I know a bad file when I see it. I think in their shoot environment, they got LUCKY. Over exposing to that degree (3 and 1/3 stops over) is not a good thing. At this point, I will demand they not do it any further, or suffer the possible negative consequences.

Von
 
EPIC Shot @ 80 ISO w/Histogram

EPIC Shot @ 80 ISO w/Histogram

redepic@80iso.001.png


REDHistogram@80ISO.png


Von
 
OK... I stand corrected. You can do anything you want as long as you test 1st and are happy with the results.

My biggest fear is the soundbite... "shoot EPIC at ISO 80. No problem." So many people will get in trouble.

Jim
 
Please don't take away ISO 320 as a setting. I often work with a DP who likes to use it all the time - he does high end tabletop food commercial filming in very controlled lighting situations for national TV spots. Clipping the RAW highlights is never an issue and he wants the ISO to match the exposure of the RAW.
 
I thought I read somewhere that the Epic base iso could be changed. So you could have the sensor rated at much lower iso, then shoot at say 320 and it would give us similar results to what we do now with 800. I really hate putting all those ND's in front of the lens. This would be really great as 800 in the middle of the day is just too much iso for shooting wide open. You have to put so much dense glass in front of the lens which really doesn't make sense when shooting with a 20k + lens.
I just can't find the original post where I read this. I think it could of come from Jim (also could of just been me scrolling though reduser too late at night for a change).

Cheers, Chris
 
I shoot a ton of footagae in super bright settings. Last week mid day on snow in Tahoe. I have been rating the Red MX at 500 for that. Shot my Epic M at 800 but also cranked the shutter to stop the action down. Pretty much shoot anything in lower light at 800 or above. Have been getting great results. Going to be testing other settings on the Epic M tomorrow along with a bunch of HDRx combos. The Formatt IRND's 1.2 and 1.5 are my go to filters.
 
A little out topic but taking Mike's comment's ...
are you guys using IRND's with EPIC?
wich one is the best?

The Formatt's Mike??

thanks

cheers
 
Working great for me on all my tests so far. Using Schneiders with no IR filtration on everything below 1.2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top