Is now the time for auto ISO?

I Initially thought that I would use this feature alot on the upcoming 5d Mark II but I find that setting everything manually in constant lighting conditions yields to must more consistent results. I will most likely use the auto ISO feature more than AV or TV mode when I am in constantly changing lighting situations though (ex. partially coudy days)

like everything else auto ISO has its uses, but i wouldn't consider it a "set it and forget it" option. it's no more appropriate than shooting in "P" mode all the time.

To me, its a little like having your parents make all the decisions for you, when you are a child. They might believe that what they are doing for you is correct, but you might not feel the same way. The more you let something else think for you, the less control you have as a part of your creativity. Some, but not all auto features on cameras give you settings that are a compromise, this might be fine if photography is not a passion, but most of the people who are on this web site , I believe are looking for something more than just pushing a button and taking what the camera gives you. I might be wrong.

savant, it depends much on your style of shooting. if you are getting good results with the auto setup then there are no problems. if you are likely to be within the same sort of lighting situation then it matters little whether you are on auto or a manual setup. however, if you shoot in differing lighting environments a consistent yield can only be achieved through manual setting of iso.

I do more wedding photography than anything. I'm inclined to make photos w/ the least noise possible.

Having said that if I can get acceptable noise levels at varying ISOs and I'm going to shoot 1/125 f/2.8 most of the time anyway, why not use auto iso? it's going to give me the lowest setting it can. I will still change these settings to suit my creative desire.

And I think it's already been acknowledged that you can get a clean image out of a body >=d300 at almost any iso.

If optimal iso for a photog = clean images, isn't that setting pretty objective? If it's objective why not let the cam decide, it should come up w/ the same thing as me right?

I hope you can tell I'm trying to be devils advocate a bit but I am curious about the rationale.

I use my iso-auto only when I am working in circumstances with low and changing light, concerts etc. I get sometimes isoos of 400 instead of the normally used 1600. I set the iso-auto at 1/(1.5)xf and to a maximum of 3200 and start fine-tuning the max iso to the lowest value.

In normal conditions I never use the iso-auto option.

First of all, setting your camera to auto ISO will not limit your creativity. You still can control your DOF and composition. True, I don't think it is a "set it and forget it" setting. When capturing the moment is more important or your subject is moving around in changing light, auto ISO is very useful. However, when I'm just shooting for myself and time is not a factor, I'm in full manual.

Every now and then, I have to snap something so quickly that I don't have time to think, or I hand my camera off to somebody who doesn't know how to use it. In those cases I use the green auto mode and I am always amazed by how good stuff comes out!

Auto ISO is a feature on my cameras, but one I have never used. I've never used (P)rofessonal mode either, but I'm not forgetting that these features are there. I prefer to be in control of those parameters which affect image quality the most - aperture and ISO. If consistency is paramount, as for portraits and group photos, I use manual mode for everything, including focus.

On the other hand, if you shoot only for yourself, who's gonna' complain :-)