Exposure Meter of M240 compared to M9

[verendus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As much as I love the new M, I am a little bit baffled about the behavior of M240 exposure behavior.  I am wondering if it needs calibration.  WIth M9, I hardly had any overexposure.  Center Weighted meter did a great job protecting highlights.  I would say, it was slightly biased towards underexposure in most circumstances.  

 

With M240, I need to keep the camera at about -0.7 in order to keep highlight from blowing out.  This is true especially when shooting indoors with mix lighting.  I usually try to find a big chunk of neutral grey tone to meter using center weighted, but the meter has been a little bit erratic.  

 

I have found M240 skin tones take take more effort to tame, and part of the reason has been due to its highlight rendition.  When images are overexposed, very difficult to maintain color balance as it tends to be one channel that is blown.

 

Please let me know if anyone has similar experience with M240.  

[Jeff S]

If you type 'overexposure with M240' in the search box, you'll find several related discussions.

 

Personally I haven't had unusual problems with M metering…before or after new FW.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[verendus]

I read the thread, and seems that no one has found a solution yet. I just measured incident light from my Sekonic and did a quick comparison with middle grey, and sure enough there is about 0.7 stop difference.  I am not sure if this is how M240 is in general or specific batch.

[jaapv]

Same here. It does not worry me, as the exposure of  a digital image is not very well defined in the ISO norm anyway. As long as one is aware of the bias of the camera for one's own particular usage, all is well.

[Jeff S]

I read the thread, and seems that no one has found a solution yet. 

Several threads.

 

Jeff

[rochus]

my experience is exactly the same, ~0.7 overexposure in most situations (admit that I did not scientifically grey-card test it...). so usually adjust the exposure compensation to -0.7 . not a big issue really, just would be nicer if the camera were calibrated towards underexposure as the M240 files have much more room in the shadows than in the highlights.

[verendus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't mind dialing in -0.7 to -1, but hope Leica will fix the issue.  $7K should not have this sort of oddity.  I much prefer slightly underexposure to any overexposure.  Red channel is usually the first to clip, so once it blow, there is nothing to recover.  

[rsolomon]

i'm new to the m 240 and noticing this. Its confusing, outside of marketing reasons to artificially attain high ISO values to understand why this was deployed in this manner. i appreciate the expert insight provided here. i continue my testing..... right now i'm dialed in at -.3 and bracketing at a 1/2 stop. i think i will end with  -.7 and still 1/2 stop bracket for a few days.  

 

i often shoot Aperture preferred so once settled i'll dial in the EC (kinda hate to need to do that). where did you settled in with settings? 

[verendus]

Yes, I find that M240 tends to meter to protect the shadows. I set mine at -0.7 pretty much full time.  This has given me the most consistent images, although there are times I may have to boost the exposure in LR a little.  Even with -0.7, the image tends to overexpose unless you are metering for highlights. I hope they will address this in the future firmware.

[sdk]

I'm not having this problem with my M-P Typ 240 versus my old M9-P. I'm using classic metering on the M-P, not the image sensor based metering modes. The DNG files seem fine to me, with no blown highlight issue.

[edwardkaraa]

I don't think any meter is smart enough so that you can dial in a -0.7 ec and leave it at that. It's true that the M240 meter tends towards overexposure and in many situations it can produce badly blown highlights but it's not any worse than the M9. I think it's just the nature of the semi spot metering of the M system. You just have to learn how to compensate like with any other meter of other cameras. And indeed you will find the meter works better with wide angles while my 85, I need to dial down at least -1 ec for normal reflectancy subjects. Just something to adapt to.

[Ellie]

Perhaps I'm missing something but in this thread you dial in -0.7 ev and in the other thread (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/228550-m240-meter-off/) they dial in +0.7 ev?

[edwardkaraa]

Perhaps I'm missing something but in this thread you dial in -0.7 ev and in the other thread (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/228550-m240-meter-off/) they dial in +0.7 ev?

 

If I understood correctly, in this thread, the subject is the camera internal meter that tends to overexpose. In the other thread, they talk about the M240 real iso values, which are 0.7 stops below the nominal values, as read by an external light meter.

[algrove]

OP

It is not clear to me if you are using "Classic" metering. IMHO, that is more attuned to M9 metering. No issues with me however I tend to go -0.3 just in case and make sure over/under is set conservatively like with any camera.

[jmahto]

I get slight overexposure in overcast days but I do not mind since I hardly get blown highlights and I reduce it in PP. This is like ETTR (I know there had been several threads on it too. ).

 

Although it is true that for M9 I didn't think about it at all. But I do get better pictures with M240 after PP.

[verendus]

I am always on classic metering. Nevery bothered with the sensor meter as it is a 2 step process. I will never use that feature. Maybe it is my meter but it does tend to overexpose by .7 stop. Especially with indoor lighting.