My recent efforts with my new Sigma 150-300 highlighted the fact that when light conditions are not the best, you can find yourself making compromises to get a shot.
If one sets the aperture to give an acceptable depth of field and the exposure time to freeze the action (or minimise wobble), then the only variable left to get the exposure right is the ISO speed.
Here's the question - is it better to let the camera bump the ISO up to give correct exposure (and thus get more noise in the image) or is it better to keep the ISO down, get an under-exposed (but less noisy) image, and then correct (increase) the exposure in LightRoom?
Which route gives the least noise in the final result? Or is the end result the same?
If one sets the aperture to give an acceptable depth of field and the exposure time to freeze the action (or minimise wobble), then the only variable left to get the exposure right is the ISO speed.
Here's the question - is it better to let the camera bump the ISO up to give correct exposure (and thus get more noise in the image) or is it better to keep the ISO down, get an under-exposed (but less noisy) image, and then correct (increase) the exposure in LightRoom?
Which route gives the least noise in the final result? Or is the end result the same?
Comment