ChrisC Posted January 26, 2010 Share #61 Posted January 26, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just got my M9......... I get the exposure for the brightest spot set exposure in camera then add 1 2/3 ev. This seems to get the highlights with a few blinkies but easily recovered in post..... Hi - I'm from the other place, but now work exclusively with manual metering from brightest highlights but with +1 2/3 exposure compensation pre-dialled in to the metering. This makes for fast and accurate metering with the M8; for tricky exposure situations I know when to throw in an 'experience tweak' of the shutter speed dial so my exposures are 'blinkies free'. I've discussed this on the M8 Forum - though some are resistant to the technique. Included in the much discussed Michael Reichmann 'open letter' was a call for highlight-centric metering for the digital age, rather than the experience tweaks and workarounds we all employ with mid-grey centric metering when protecting highlights. A metering system which accurately nails exposure from the starting point of highlight protection is long overdue as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad Michael Reichmann raised the subject; when I tried it the idea carried suspicions of eccentricity rather than 'weight'. To the original poster; learn manual metering - it will reward you. ................ Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 26, 2010 Posted January 26, 2010 Hi ChrisC, Take a look here Metering and Exposure. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
UliWer Posted January 26, 2010 Share #62 Posted January 26, 2010 I tend to agree with nhabedi about the missing information on the present M9 manual, as simple as 2 page information which can help new owners (who are used to the matrix system in dslr) to get familiar with the pattern; after all they were included in the M6, M7 and M8 manuals. If one can judge initially how wide the coverage is with certain focal length, one can skip the step of exposure compensation even if it's just a matter of one button or two away. Just like a few users here, i do use the exposure compensation feature, usually when there isn't much light deviation; at other times i just use exposure lock to find a mid-grey target to lock it. I agree with you principally, though is there practically so much difference between the cameras and/or focal lenghths? I got used to take the frames of 135mm or if you can't see them what I imagine to be the frames on any focal length for the metering zone. The field for metering may be bigger in reality, but It works in the way gpleica describes explicitely in his posting above. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_K Posted January 27, 2010 Share #63 Posted January 27, 2010 I agree with you principally, though is there practically so much difference between the cameras and/or focal lenghths? I got used to take the frames of 135mm or if you can't see them what I imagine to be the frames on any focal length for the metering zone. The field for metering may be bigger in reality, but It works in the way gpleica describes explicitely in his posting above. Well, it's primarily my own fault as i got carry away and forgot what lens i had on the camera after a few switch around, but i am learning from my mistake. Say for example i am shooting at a stage lit subject with spot light over her, i had a 90mm attached but thought it was some wider focal length, as it's pretty dark i can't even see those focal length borders inside my viewfinder. If i were to snap away without any compensation i would have got a nice shot but thinking it's a wider lens, i compensate because of the "wider" central weight coverage of its metering pattern and ended up under-exposing the film. It was way back then with my M6 and i didn't even realize till the film got developed in a day or two, by that time too late for a re-shoot :-( So i believe one needs to be mentally aware of this relationship between the metering pattern and focal length, at least that applies to me and my mistake in the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted January 27, 2010 Share #64 Posted January 27, 2010 No. If you don't know how big the area is, you can't lock the meter to a darker or lighter area... I would love to have your skills in measuring light/darker areas and directly apply EV corrections, while at the same time taking into account Leica's light meters measuring footprint, but I am not. I jut take pics, usually with -EV... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted January 27, 2010 Share #65 Posted January 27, 2010 I agree with you principally, though is there practically so much difference between the cameras and/or focal lenghths? I got used to take the frames of 135mm or if you can't see them what I imagine to be the frames on any focal length for the metering zone. The field for metering may be bigger in reality, but It works in the way gpleica describes explicitely in his posting above. Again, you must understand that the metering field has no fixed relation to either the actual, physical scenery in front of the camera, or even to the size of the totasl finder field of view. Its size is related to -- now listen -- to the IMAGE ON THE SENSOR. And that varies with the lens used. Therefore, the metering field can be visualised as an oval, with major and minor axis of about 2/3 of the long and short dimensions of the finder frame FOR THE LENS MOUNTED. Change the lens, and the metering field changes. I can't understand why this is so difficult to understand. The metering field of the outboard Leicameter MR was fixed: It was always about the size of the frame for the 90mm lens, no matter what lens was on the camera. But that was because that meter did not meter through the lens, but independently of it. The old man from the Age of Hand-Held Meters Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted January 27, 2010 Share #66 Posted January 27, 2010 For me every exposure technique has its limits and you can apply the same way in so different situations. Sometimes I don't mind the shadows and sometimes I don't mind the highlights and sometimes I need both. Everything depends on what and how I'm shooting and the picture that I imagine in my head. The most important is to know the light and its quality to know how to work. It is not the same shooting landscapes or street photography. Sometimes I have time to decide and sometimes not. Shooting street photography I can decide the aperture in the last instant using Aperture priority (mode A) blocking quickly where I want. But when I see that there are too many dark areas that will cheat the exposure meter, then I change quickly to manual. The same for the highlights. Sometimes I stay shooting the same with the same idea, then I use manual mode. In many situations I would use just manual, but now I'm using many times different iso, so I don't know my limits so well and I prefer to see the exposure value. I have to learn the new possibilities of this camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pelagia Posted January 27, 2010 Share #67 Posted January 27, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Therefore, the metering field can be visualised as an oval, with major and minor axis of about 2/3 of the long and short dimensions of the finder frame FOR THE LENS MOUNTED. Change the lens, and the metering field changes. I can't understand why this is so difficult to understand. Lars, sorry, again I think that your message may be misleading. I try to reiterate (sorry for my simplified English), see if you agree with my explanation. It is important to mention that the light is measured as reflected from the shutter curtain and has nothing to do with the focal length of the lens mounted. The physical size of the spot ( the "measured oval") is always the same. What changes is the size of the spot when you look at framelines in the viewfinder. With wide lenses the area of the spot is bigger and with tele lenses it shrinks in accordance with framelines. You should yourself imagine the spot (13%?? of the area covered by given framelines) in relation to each lens. I suppose this is the reason why Leica would not describe the size of the measuring spot. Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted January 27, 2010 Share #68 Posted January 27, 2010 Again, you must understand that the metering field has no fixed relation to either the actual, physical scenery in front of the camera, or even to the size of the totasl finder field of view. Its size is related to -- now listen -- to the IMAGE ON THE SENSOR. And that varies with the lens used. Obviously, the image on the sensor is directly related to the physical scenery, it surely is a part of it according to lens used, but it's directly related ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted January 27, 2010 Share #69 Posted January 27, 2010 Why do we make the easy stuff difficult??? Therefore, the metering field can be visualised as an oval, with major and minor axis of about 2/3 of the long and short dimensions of the finder frame FOR THE LENS MOUNTED. Change the lens, and the metering field changes. I can't understand why this is so difficult to understand. The exposure meter, has nothing to do with the sensor. The shutter blades and in particular that specially coated reflection stripe is its measure area. A photo diode just picks up whatever luminance it finds there, after whatever Aperture you have set and according to lens. Because the stripe is centered, whatever it is you see in the finder in that patch, is the stripe that gets measured. Edit: here is how Leica explains it: Exposure metering On the LEICA M9, exposure metering for the available ambient light is performed through the lens with the working aperture. The light reflected by the bright shutter blades in the first shutter curtain is captured by a photo diode and measured. This silicon photo diode with forward-facing convex lens is positioned at the bottom center, in the case of the camera. Now because of that convex lens in front of the photocell, luminosity is measured in the very center of the stripe, covering the patch Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viooh Posted January 27, 2010 Share #70 Posted January 27, 2010 I just wonder why no one has mentioned the good old rule no.1 for digital shooting - always expose to the right. AE of the M9 most of the time is quite ok for non-processed out of the box results, but in most of the cases the M9 produces raw files that are sub-optimum for post processing because they are seriously underexposed, leaving much of the sensor's potential for fine tone differenciation in the darker areas of the picture unused. So for optimum results, there simply is no alternative to looking at histograms, and for spontaneous AE shooting a little bit of plus exposure compensation - ok, that is at the risk of blowing out highlights - works fine for me, as a rule. Again, this only makes sense if you're prepared to do some post processing. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted January 27, 2010 Share #71 Posted January 27, 2010 I do not get the point of that old rule #1. This concept is very popular especially with the high iso fans but it limits the photographer in my point of view. There are three ways to correctly expose an image: a) clipping at the lower end, clipping at both ends or within the range of the sensor or c) clipping at the higher end. It all only depends on the intentions of the photographer. Personnally I often get caught by images which are clipped at one end. Automatic control only adresses option . To cover all three options manual mode is best. Regards Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_K Posted January 28, 2010 Share #72 Posted January 28, 2010 Hmm, i wasn't fully aware of rule #1 either. I read an article early on by Bruno Stevens, even though at the time he's using the M8, he under-exposed his images by 2/3 stops to avoid clipping of the highlight, which is just the opposite of rule #1. Please correct me if i am wrong, may be there really is a huge difference between M8 and M9's metering execution? btw here's Bruno's article for pleasure reading :- Leica M8: The Leica M8 on Assignment by Bruno Stevens / The Digital Filmmaker / Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted January 28, 2010 Share #73 Posted January 28, 2010 Steve: automatic + EV offset = manual mode. Just that the M8 doesn't have that EV wheel the M9 has. On an M9, you can leave A mode on and play with the wheel, but it will only do Aperture priority. Whereas on manual you can have both EV control and also shutter priority... if you really need it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viooh Posted January 28, 2010 Share #74 Posted January 28, 2010 Sorry, I obviously wasn't precise enough. The "expose to the right" rule doesn't necessarily mean clipping highlights, it only says that you have to look at the histogram and adjust exposure until the brightest parts of the picture that still have to show details show on the right edge of the histogram. My experience using AE on the M9 is that in contrast situations where contrast does not exceed the exposure range of the sensor, AE choses a middle exposure, leaving room for longer exposures without clipping highlights. In these situations the rule works perfectly. Once contrast exceeds the EV range of the sensor, its your decision at which end of the scale to accept clipping. Still, for a good decision you'd have to take a look at the historgram. Hey, you know all this, don't you? This is the leica forum! Cheers! Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted January 28, 2010 Share #75 Posted January 28, 2010 Peter, The best "setting" for "correct" exposure is to use the least EV offset while at the same time having no or the least highlight clips. Obviously you might not want to do this. You might want to enhance darks/shadows and don't mind clips. It's what you wanna do in the end. Correct exposure might kill your shadows at times, when light is very bright Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted January 28, 2010 Share #76 Posted January 28, 2010 Hey, you know all this, don't you? This is the leica forum! Cheers! Peter Many of us do know, but it is still a very sound piece of advice, and as such, it bears repeating. The M9 sells well, and new members are coming in. Some have a background in film -- very often negative, where the rule is the exact opposite -- and some from auto-everything compacts or DSLRs. The old man from the Adox Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pelagia Posted January 28, 2010 Share #77 Posted January 28, 2010 I read an article early on by Bruno Stevens, even though at the time he's using the M8, he under-exposed his images by 2/3 stops to avoid clipping of the highlight, which is just the opposite of rule #1. I followed your link to the article, there are 3 images B Stevens is proudly presenting. In my opinion underexposing was the wrong technique, his images result in extensive uniform black areas with no detail. BTW, what is the term in English opposite to "burned highlights", to describe shadows with zero info? An interesting binary math explaining of "exposing to the right" is in the LL here: Expose Right Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 28, 2010 Share #78 Posted January 28, 2010 Blocked shadows Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_K Posted January 28, 2010 Share #79 Posted January 28, 2010 I followed your link to the article, there are 3 images B Stevens is proudly presenting. In my opinion underexposing was the wrong technique, his images result in extensive uniform black areas with no detail. BTW, what is the term in English opposite to "burned highlights", to describe shadows with zero info? An interesting binary math explaining of "exposing to the right" is in the LL here: Expose Right Tom I find the examples given by Bruno echo what some of us said earlier on, choosing which part of the picture to emphasize or otherwise (which i believe the lack of detail in some shadow area). It's a personal choice vs an ideal exposure as per histogram, which sometimes can create a more powerful image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted January 28, 2010 Share #80 Posted January 28, 2010 As I understand now the expose to the right concept leads to the lowest signal to noise ratio but requires change of the exposure in pp to give the image the photographer endeavours. In contrasty szenes do you apply this rule to the hole frame or do you limit it to the main subject which could very well lead to clipping of highlights? What is your approach? Regards Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.