I'm not sure what you're implying and I'm not going to assume. But I too shoot almost exclusively in aperture priority (non-photo people: I pick the F stop, camera decides shutter speed, same as guy above)
It's extremely rare for cameras (of any brand and model) to pick 1/8000, even on a bright sunny day unless ISO is bumped up high (by the photographer). And if ISO was set to "auto", the chances of 1/8000 being selected is as good as zero because the camera is going to lower ISO first to something like 100, 125 or 160 (as low as it'll go on most cameras) before it increases shutter speed.
And there's no reason to bump up ISO when conditions are brightly lit unless you explicitly want to increase shutter speed. Any photographer worth squat is going to lower ISO on a sunny day because even with ISO 100, the shutter speed is going to be something like 1/1000 to 1/2000 anyway which is fast enough to capture all sorts of moving subjects including race cars.
What I'm trying to say is, getting the shutter speed up to 1/8000 was a deliberate choice made by the photographer who took the Trump shot. And just like the OP X post, I'd ask "Why?" unless he was expecting something very fast moving to happen.
Typically, the higher the ISO, the higher the noise - that will be true within any closed system. Quality optics and imagers with large cells and high quantum efficiency will allow shorter exposure times with the same ISO.
In any case, you are correct. A typical high end camera system will pick ISO's that favor picture quality. A photographer will pick settings for the moment.
On a side note, many moons back I had a project where they wanted to know if we could image a fast moving object (on industrial equipment) and I was able to get to an effective shutter speed of 1/2000000. The camera couldn't do it - that required specialized lighting. Jitter in the system required a camera shutter of around 1/20000.
When I worked on my PhD, digital cameras were first hitting the scene (I used conventional B&W film). I looked into converting my equipment to digital. At the time I believe Canon was selling an 8 megapixel digital camera for about $8,000. The conventional B&W film was equivalent to about 34 megapixels (resolution of about 5 microns). I just checked and 400 megapixel digital cameras are out there, if you want to pay around $8,000 :) Pretty interesting that state of the art digital cameras cost about the same as almost 30 years ago, but with 50x the resolution.
I'm not sure what you're implying and I'm not going to assume. But I too shoot almost exclusively in aperture priority (non-photo people: I pick the F stop, camera decides shutter speed, same as guy above)
It's extremely rare for cameras (of any brand and model) to pick 1/8000, even on a bright sunny day unless ISO is bumped up high (by the photographer). And if ISO was set to "auto", the chances of 1/8000 being selected is as good as zero because the camera is going to lower ISO first to something like 100, 125 or 160 (as low as it'll go on most cameras) before it increases shutter speed.
And there's no reason to bump up ISO when conditions are brightly lit unless you explicitly want to increase shutter speed. Any photographer worth squat is going to lower ISO on a sunny day because even with ISO 100, the shutter speed is going to be something like 1/1000 to 1/2000 anyway which is fast enough to capture all sorts of moving subjects including race cars.
What I'm trying to say is, getting the shutter speed up to 1/8000 was a deliberate choice made by the photographer who took the Trump shot. And just like the OP X post, I'd ask "Why?" unless he was expecting something very fast moving to happen.
Typically, the higher the ISO, the higher the noise - that will be true within any closed system. Quality optics and imagers with large cells and high quantum efficiency will allow shorter exposure times with the same ISO.
In any case, you are correct. A typical high end camera system will pick ISO's that favor picture quality. A photographer will pick settings for the moment.
On a side note, many moons back I had a project where they wanted to know if we could image a fast moving object (on industrial equipment) and I was able to get to an effective shutter speed of 1/2000000. The camera couldn't do it - that required specialized lighting. Jitter in the system required a camera shutter of around 1/20000.
I'm so old I still remember the day I traded in my pterodactyl chisel box for a canon 35mm.
LOL. I worked with digital cameras before they hit the consumer market.
Edit - maybe I should qualify that statement. VCR video cameras were all the rage then, so technically....not quite true.
When I worked on my PhD, digital cameras were first hitting the scene (I used conventional B&W film). I looked into converting my equipment to digital. At the time I believe Canon was selling an 8 megapixel digital camera for about $8,000. The conventional B&W film was equivalent to about 34 megapixels (resolution of about 5 microns). I just checked and 400 megapixel digital cameras are out there, if you want to pay around $8,000 :) Pretty interesting that state of the art digital cameras cost about the same as almost 30 years ago, but with 50x the resolution.