Fujifilm high ISO | FUJI X WEEKLY

Exposure Triangle, Part 3: Understanding ISO

*Fujifilm X-T30 – ISO 25600 – Ilford HP5 Plus 400 Push Process*

Part 1: Aperture, Part 2: Shutter

As we’ve already discussed, aperture determines the amount of light that enters the camera, and shutter speed determines for how long that light is allowed to expose the camera’s sensor. The third aspect of the exposure triangle is ISO, which is how sensitive the sensor is to that light. Well, that’s not exactly true. ISO works much different with digital sensors than it did with silver halide film, but the basic premise is similar: the higher the ISO, the brighter and “grainer” the image; the lower the ISO, the darker and “cleaner” the image. ISO is found in the camera’s menu, and on some models is controlled by a knob on the top plate or via a wheel around the shutter knob.

This is the simplest of the three exposure triangle elements to grasp, and yet maybe the most difficult. With things like dual-native ISO and ISO invariance, it can be quite confusing. I don’t want to get too deep into the weeds here, because it doesn’t really matter all that much. Basically, Fujifilm cameras technically have just two ISOs: base gain (ISO 200 on X-Trans III and older, ISO 160 on X-Trans IV, ISO 125 on X-Trans V) and second gain (ISO 800 on X-Trans III and older, ISO 640 on X-Trans IV, and ISO 500 on X-Trans V). The base gain is the cleanest of the two. As the ISO is increased from the base gain, the picture becomes “noisier” (a.k.a. “grainier” or “grittier”) because the brightness is being turned up, making the digital noise more obvious. At the second gain point, a switch activates the second base ISO, and the image is actually cleaner than the ISO directly below it. As the ISO is increased from the second gain, it becomes “noisier” because the brightness is being turned up, making the digital noise more obvious. You could photograph at just those two ISOs, and using software increase the brightness, and the results will be the same as increasing the ISO in-camera. Clear as mud?

Another point worth mentioning is that Dynamic Range (DR) and D-Range Priority (DR-P) settings are ISO-dependent. In order to use DR400 or DR-P Strong, the minimum ISO required is ISO 800 on X-Trans III and older, ISO 640 on X-Trans IV, and ISO 500 on X-Trans V. For DR200 or DR-P Weak, the minimum ISOs are 400, 320, and 250, respectively. DR200 and DR400 are unavailable at the extended ISOs. This illustrates another point of confusion: while the maximum dynamic range (range of details between deep shadow and bright highlight) for DR100 is at base ISO, the maximum dynamic range in general is at the second gain point with the camera set to DR400 or DR-P Strong. Confusing, right?

*Fujifilm X-T50 – ISO 51200 – Nostalgic Neg. film simulation*

The old rule of thumb for ISO was to keep it as low as possible, and only increase it when necessary. I think that advice is a little outdated. Fujifilm cameras produce clean results that are very difficult to distinguish from each other at and below the second gain point, and are still pretty clean at and below ISO 1600. Above ISO 1600 the noise becomes more obvious, and it’s up to each person to determine just how high is too high, how much noise is too much noise. Generally speaking, on X-Trans III and newer cameras, I personally find that color photographs are good up to ISO 6400 and black-and-white up to ISO 12800. There are, of course, exceptions to this. You might desire the gritty aesthetic produced by using ultra-high ISOs. Each person’s tastes are different.

Because (for the most part) ISO isn’t all that important, I like to let the camera choose it for me with Auto-ISO. This works with either the Aperture or Shutter set to “A” (Aperture-Priority or Shutter-Priority). In Auto-ISO, the camera will choose the lowest ISO possible, and only increase it when necessary. You can choose the top and bottom ISO values, and the minimum shutter speed. It works really well most of the time. Also, like aperture and shutter, there are full stops (ISO 200, 400, 800 etc.) and intermediate third stops (ISO 250, 320, 500, 640, etc.).

Unless you desire a “grainy” photo, you want to keep the ISO low (however, no lower than the minimum for the Dynamic Range setting used). Find the maximum ISO that you are comfortable with, and set that as the top value of your Auto-ISO (basically, you can set-and-forget). I think a lot of people worry too much about ISO and digital noise—I invite you to try a higher ISO than you might otherwise set as the maximum, as you might find it to be more useful than you previously thought. For the cleanest photographs, keep the ISO low, no higher than the second gain point for your camera.

ISO 51200 — Why?!? — Or, is it actually useful?

Posted on July 31, 2024 by Ritchie Roesch

*Fujifilm X-T50 – ISO 51200 – Nostalgic Negative*

Today’s digital cameras are exceptionally good at high ISO. For those unaware, ISO can be understood as a measurement of the sensitivity of a digital sensor or film emulsion to light. The more sensitive, the more grainy or noisy, which degrades the image quality. My question is: why do our Fujifilm X-series models even have ISO 51200? Who would ever use it?

I remember way back in the film days that ISO 400 was considered to be “high ISO”—that’s what the “H” stands for in Fujicolor PRO 400H, actually. ISO 800 was largely used only if you really had to (or for the novice that didn’t know any better—Kodak made a lot of sales of ISO 800 and ISO 1000 film back in the day marketed specifically to the uninformed). ISO 1600 was basically for emergency situations. ISO 3200—the upper limit—was for the truly brave. The higher ISOs were more acceptable (and more widely used) for B&W than color, where the grittiness could be used artistically. Still, the rule of thumb back then was to always use the lowest ISO that you thought you could get away with.

Nowadays, with modern gear, I use ISO 800 without even batting an eye. ISO 1600 is more like how ISO 400 was back them—perfectly usable, but the high-ISO limit for some. ISO 3200 on my Fujifilm cameras is actually much more usable than ISO 800 film ever was—ISO 6400 is probably a closer parallel to ISO 800 film, yet cleaner.

*Fujifilm X-T30 – ISO 25600 – Ilford HP5 Plus 400 Push Process Recipe*

For color photography, ISO 6400 is often my upper limit, but sometimes I’ll use ISO 12800, like with the GAF 500 Recipe. For B&W, ISO 12800 is often my upper limit; however, there are times when I’ve used ISO 25600 or (more rarely) ISO 51200, like with the Ilford HP5 Plus 400 Push-Process Recipe. I feel like ISO 25600 is probably the closest equivalent on Fujifilm X cameras to ISO 3200 with film.

The fact that I use ISO 6400 and sometimes ISO 12800 (particularly for B&W) without being too concerned about the quality is mind blowing. Even going back just 15 years… I remember accidentally shooting at ISO 1600 on my first DSLR, and the pictures were essentially ruined by it. ISO 800 was pretty much the upper limit for that camera before the image quality degraded too much. Some people probably don’t realize just how good their Fujifilm cameras are at high ISO photography.

Several people have told me that they avoid Film Simulation Recipes that use DR400 because the Dynamic Range settings are ISO-dependent, and DR400 requires a higher ISO than they are comfortable using. Everyone has their own tastes and preferences, but I would encourage anyone who is afraid to try higher ISOs to just give it a try and see what you discover. Don’t be afraid to bump it up a little.

*Fujifilm X-T5 – ISO 25600 — Ilford HP5 Plus 400 Push Process Recipe*

On Fujifilm models that don’t have a dedicated ISO Dial, I will use the front Command Dial to adjust the ISO. The unfortunate aspect of this is that I occasionally bump the Command Dial, which changes the ISO—most often, to ISO 51200, which is the camera’s maximum ISO. I usually catch it right away, but sometimes it’s not until after a few exposures.

Whenever this happens, I wonder why Fujifilm even has ISO 51200. Why not top it out at ISO 25600? While ISO 25600 isn’t especially useful for color photography, it can be good for gritty B&W. ISO 51200 is marginal even for gritty B&W, and is pretty much unusable for color. And who needs ISO 51200 anyway? Certainly the situations are extremely rare where ISO 12800 is too low, let alone ISO 25600.

Just recently, though, I had a change of heart. Actually, I had an epiphany: ISO 51200 on Fujifilm is a lot like Kodak Kodacolor VR 1000 film. When Kodak released that emulsion in the early 1980’s, it was the highest ISO color film available. However, the pictures were quite grainy and textured, and the film was shunned by most “serious” photographers at the time (and discontinued after just four years). Nowadays, there are actually some people who search out the film (which has long since expired), and shoot it for its aesthetic. Instead, they could simply use ISO 51200 on a Fujifilm camera and get similar results. You won’t want to print very large, but for web use or small prints, it’s surprisingly fine.

Below are some pictures that I captured recently using ISO 51200 on a Fujifilm X-T50. It began as an accident, but then I did it on purpose. The “Recipe” is a modification of an upcoming Film Simulation Recipe that I’ve been working on. Most of the pictures below are the Nostalgic Neg. film simulation, and one is Eterna. Those two film sims seem to be the best for ultra high ISO color photography.

This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.

Fujifilm X-T50 in black:
Amazon, B&H, Moment, Wex, Nuzira
Fujifilm X-T50 in silver:
Amazon, B&H, Moment, Wex, Nuzira
Fujifilm X-T50 in charcoal:
Amazon, B&H, Moment, Wex

7 Film Simulation Recipes for Ultra-High-ISO Photography

Posted on March 10, 2023 by Ritchie Roesch

*Garden Spiderweb* – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4 – GAF 500 Recipe – ISO 12800

I remember when ISO 400 used to be consider high ISO. In fact, the “H” in Fujicolor Pro 400H means high ISO. When I shot film, I usually didn’t go higher than ISO 400, although on a rare occasion I did go wild and use an ISO 800, 1600, or (gasp!) 3200 emulsion (those were ultra-high-ISOs back then), when the expected light was dim and a tripod wasn’t practical. When I started shooting digital almost 15 years ago, I remember that ISO 1600 on my first DSLR was barely usable in a pinch, and it was best to stay at or below ISO 800. Nowadays those limitations are long gone.

Thanks to the X-Trans color array, Fujifilm is better able to differentiate color noise from color information (than with a Bayer array), allowing more control over how noise is rendered. Because of this, the APS-C sensor on Fujifilm X cameras does pretty darn well at high-ISO photography. Yes, it can get noisy, but the noise is more organic-looking and less color-splotchy (perhaps even a little film-grain-like) than non-X-Trans cameras typically produce.

Still, a lot of photographers are hesitant to try high-ISO photography. I’ve had someone tell me that they never go beyond ISO 800 on their Fujifilm cameras. Someone else said that they don’t use Film Simulation Recipes with DR400 because it requires an ISO that they’re not comfortable using. Everyone has their own preferred upper ISO limit—mine might be higher than yours, and that’s ok. What I’d like to do, though, is encourage you to step outside of your comfort zone, and try some ISOs that you would not normally—or perhaps ever—use.

You might want to use ultra-high-ISOs—which I consider to be ISO 12800 and higher, but your definition might be different—in dim light situations, such as at night or in a poorly lit room. That’s probably the most common reason. I will sometimes use really high ISOs in daylight when it’s not even necessary just for the aesthetic of it. Crazy, right?! I think sometimes digital can appear too clean, and an ultra-high-ISO can give the picture a grittier look, more similar to some film emulsions.

Of course, using ultra-high-ISOs in daylight can be problematic because the light is strong. My Fujifilm X100V has a built-in ND filter, which makes it more practical. Otherwise, screwing an ND filter onto the end of the lens will help. If you don’t have one, be sure to use your camera’s electronic shutter (instead of the mechanical one) because it is capable of faster shutter speeds. You might also have to use small apertures like f/11 or f/16 to reduce the light entering the camera.

If you want to give it a try, below are seven Film Simulation Recipes that use ultra-high-ISOs. Many of them go “up to” an ultra-high-ISO, so in that case you’d want to purposefully choose a high ISO instead of a low one. Give one or more of these Recipes a try today! Leave a comment to let me know which one (or ones) you like. My personal top favorites are GAF 500 for color and Kodak Tri-X 400 for B&W.

ISO 12800

Up to ISO 12800

Up to ISO 25600

ISO 1600-12800

Ilford Delta Push Process

ISO 12800

Kodak Tri-X Push Process

ISO 3200-12800

Ilford HP5 Plus 400 Push Process

ISO 25600-51200

Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!

Help Fuji X Weekly

Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!

$5.00

Making the Fujifilm X-T5 Make a Lot of Noise — Testing High-ISO on X-Trans V

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Ritchie Roesch

*Lights from a Frosted Window* – Williams, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – “Kodachrome 64” – ISO 6400

A lot of people have asked me if the Fujifilm X-T5, with the new 40-megapixel X-Trans V sensor and processor, is better or worse than the 26-megapixel X-Trans IV cameras when it comes to high-ISO noise. Conventional wisdom would suggest that the lower-resolution sensor would be superior. Is it? Or did Fujifilm pull a rabbit out of a magic hat and somehow make X-Trans V better at high-ISO despite more megapixels?

I’ve spent some time pixel-peeping, comparing X-Trans V to X-Trans IV. Right off the bat I can tell you that both are pretty similar to each other. You’ll have a very hard time noticing the differences without pixel-peeping, and with pixel-peeping, they’re still quite similar. Below I’ve included a massive crop from an X-Trans V camera and an X-Trans IV camera. If these crops were sections of the whole pictures printed, I don’t know how large the prints would be, but they would be very large, so keep that in mind. The picture on the left (revealed by moving the bar to the right) is X-Trans IV, and the picture on the right (revealed by moving the bar to the left) is X-Trans V. Take a look at these two images.

You likely notice that the X-Trans V image is a little more detailed with noticeably finer digital noise, while the X-Trans IV picture is a tad fuzzier with chunkier digital noise. This is a result of the higher resolution sensor of the 40mp X-Trans V camera. What might be less obvious is that there seems to be just a bit more color blotchiness in the X-Trans V image. Perhaps even less obvious, I believe the X-Trans V camera is applying a slightly heavier-handed noise reduction to the picture than X-Trans IV, despite both set to -4 High ISO NR. However, please take all of this with a grain of salt, because we’re seriously pixel-peeping here. In real world photography, both cameras are pretty darn good at high-ISO, and neither are significantly better or worse than the other, and there’s no practical variance between the two. Unless you print posters or crop deeply, you’re not going to even notice a difference—even if you did print large or crop massively, the differences are pretty minor, but I guess you can feel confident that ultra-high ISO pictures will look slightly better (for the most part) on X-Trans V than X-Trans IV. That’s the takeaway, I think: high-ISO on X-Trans V cameras are just a hair better than X-Trans IV, but not enough to make a practical difference for most people. What I will add, though, is that it’s pretty amazing that they could do this while also increasing the resolution. I do wonder, though, if Fujifilm could make—say—a 20mp X-Trans camera with significantly increased dynamic range and high-ISO performance—that’s something I would be highly interested in.

Below are a few more high-ISO examples from my Fujifilm X-T5 camera.

*Polar* – Williams, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – “GAF 500” – ISO 12800

*Train Wheels* – Williams, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – “GAF 500” – ISO 12800

*Tracks* – Williams, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – “Kodachrome 64” – ISO 6400

*Polar Express Passengers* – Williams, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – “Kodak Tri-X 400” – ISO 12800

*Tree Lights* – Williams, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – “Kodachrome 64” – ISO 6400

This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.

Fujifilm X-T5 in black: Amazon B&H
Fujifilm X-T5 in silver: Amazon B&H

When Does ISO Matter?

Posted on January 12, 2019 by Ritchie Roesch

Modern cameras have amazing high-ISO capabilities. Back in the days of film, ISO 400 was considered high-ISO by many (including Fujifilm, who designated all their ISO 400 films with the letter “H” for high-speed), and ISO 1600 was ultra-high-ISO, used only out of absolute necessity or by the brave who wanted a certain gritty look. Nowadays some photographers don’t even think of ISO 1600 as a high-ISO setting, and don’t think twice about using it. For many, high-ISO doesn’t really begin until ISO 3200, and ultra-high-ISO doesn’t begin until you go above ISO 6400. It’s really unbelievable!

The real question is this: when does ISO matter? Since modern cameras make such good-looking images at incredibly high sensitivities, when should you start considering image quality degradation? When is a certain ISO setting too high? That’s what I want to answer.

Of course, since this is the Fuji X Weekly blog, I’m discussing Fujifilm X cameras, specifically X-Trans III. This won’t apply 100% to other cameras, but it’s still relevant to some degree no matter the camera make and model. If you are reading this with another camera in mind, take everything said here with a small grain of salt.

I did a little experiment just to better understand all of this ISO stuff. I already knew the answer from experience even before beginning the experiment, but I wanted to see if my instincts matched reality. I captured a few sets of identical pictures, all straight-out-of-camera JPEGs from a Fujifilm X-T20, using ISO 400 and ISO 6400. I made sure that all of the settings were the same between the identical pictures except for ISO and shutter speed. This isn’t 100% scientific, but it’s a controlled-enough test to draw some conclusions about ISO capabilities.

Here are the original pictures:

ISO 400 – my Ektachrome 100SW recipe

ISO 6400

ISO 400 – my Velvia recipe

ISO 6400

ISO 400 – my Acros Push-Process recipe

ISO 6400

There’s not a lot that can be learned by looking at the above images, other than when viewing images on the web the ISO doesn’t matter whatsoever because it’s incredibly difficult to spot the differences even when comparing side-by-side. In real life nobody does side-by-side comparisons, that’s pretty much an internet-only thing, so it would be impossible to tell if a picture was captured using a low-ISO or high-ISO just by looking at it on your screen. We need to look much closer to really gain anything from this test. Below are some crops from the above images.

ISO 400

ISO 6400

ISO 400

ISO 6400

ISO 400

ISO 6400

If you study the color crops carefully, you’ll notice that the ISO 400 images are cleaner, sharper and have just a hair more dynamic range, but the differences are quite small and subtle. You really have to look carefully to find them. With the black-and-white image, the differences are even less obvious, and I actually prefer the ISO 6400 version, as it seems to have a more film-like quality. Looking at the crops clarifies things a little, but what kind of conclusions can we really draw?

My opinion with regards to color photography and ISO is this: if I’m printing smaller than 16″ x 24″ or displaying the pictures on the web, I don’t find any practical difference between base ISO and ISO 6400. Even ISO 12800 can be acceptable, especially if I’m not going to print the picture. If I’m going to print 16″ x 24″ or larger, a lower ISO is better, preferably less than ISO 3200, but it’s not a big deal to use up to ISO 6400. The ISO that I select does not make a huge difference to the outcome of the image, so I don’t worry a whole lot about it. Put more simply, if I print large, it’s preferable but not critical that I use a lower ISO, and if I don’t print large it doesn’t matter at all.

My opinion with regards to black-and-white photography and ISO is this: the ISO doesn’t matter much at all no matter how large I’m printing, and I often prefer (just by a little) high-ISO over low-ISO because it looks more analog. I freely use without hesitation any ISO up to 12800. Thanks to the Acros film simulation, Fujifilm X cameras are some of the best monochrome cameras on the market, and with that film simulation, often times the higher the ISO the better.

These are, of course, my opinions, and not everyone is going to agree with them, and that’s perfectly alright. Find what works for you. Use a higher ISO or lower ISO if that’s what you need for your pictures, because, after all, they’re your pictures. I’m not here to judge your camera setting choices, only to offer mine, which I’m hoping is helpful to some of you. I hope that this article makes sense and clarifies some things regarding high-ISO on Fujifilm X cameras.

Below is a video that I made on this topic: