M9 constantly underexposes

[Maximus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know the M9's meter is heavily centre-weighted ad I know this can present difficulties for those who are accustomed to DSLR-type evaluative metering, but I am finding that virtually every single one of my photos is underexposed by around 1 stop although this varies with subject matter.

 

Is it possible the meter needs calibrating? Has anyone else had a similar experience?

[lars_bergquist]

People use meters (including camera meters) differently. You will have to check this:

 

a) Meter an evenly coloured and evenly lit surface with the camera, and with a first class hand meter that you trust. The two should agree.

 

Let the Leica rep do it.

 

There is no other way to do it. You must simply get away from your subjective verdicts and get some firm objective facts under your feet.

 

The old man from the Age of the Weston Master

[vikasmg]

The old man from the Age of the Weston Master

Oh, wasn't that a meter! A Weston, a IIIg and not a battery in sight.

 

Regarding M9, I have not had this problem. In fact with the M8 I often felt that I liked my pictures a third or a half stop underexposed. With e M9 I have not needed to do that.

 

- Vikas

[jaapv]

I'm not sure the method proposed is the most optimal for a digital camera. It is a point of discussion whether the middle gray on a digital file should be 18%. I would use the two cameras I want to compare on that evenly lit surface, not an exposure meter.

[diogenis]

Why dont you check with the various light levels and see by yourself, before trying a Leica rep to see if your camera is off.

Exposure value - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

There is a chance your meter is off... use the tables, they are accurate enough...

 

oh and a question: how do you find every single one of your photos as underexposed?

[01af]

Check if an exposure bias is set.

 

By the way, while the M9 (and most other digital cameras, too) will expose properly for low-contrast subjects, it tends to over-expose for high-contrast subjects. So I often use a small negative bias, such as -0.3 EV or -0.7 EV, to protect the highlights from burning out.

[Xmas]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi

 

Load fresh battery, cause you may need lots of shots.

 

Pick a subject you take a lot of.

 

Start with correct iso, shoot, take several shots varying iso one step.

 

Decide the one you like best, note iso. You may have to load to computer and print to be sure.

 

Repeat for different subject types and illumination, back lit, contra jour, dull day, twilight, etc.

 

The meter on a M8 or M9 needs a photogs nose against the LCD screen, it is not a DSLR with built in intelligence, for dumb punter.

 

If you burn a high light it is lost, you might salvage something from a shadow...

 

If the subject is difficult you ma need several shots...

 

Noel

[batmobile]

I agree. Compare against what you know, not against an arbitrary (albeit important) standard in the first instance at least. This will tell you if it is giving less exposure than your SLR when shooting a uniformly lit subject and so rule out metering patterns etc as being responsible for the difference.

 

I'm not sure the method proposed is the most optimal for a digital camera. It is a point of discussion whether the middle gray on a digital file should be 18%. I would use the two cameras I want to compare on that evenly lit surface, not an exposure meter.

[Maximus]

I'm not sure my opening post was clear enough. Shooting a wide variety of fairly normal subjects my M9 consistently produces under exposed images when exposure is determined by the camera's built-in meter (A mode). It never produces over-exposed images but at least 90% of all images produced are too dark.

 

Here's a snap I took a few days ago with no PP at all.

 

 

Same pic with just +1 stop of exposure applied in Lightroom.

 

[chris_tribble]

Don't forget it's not matrix metering on an all singing all dancing DSLR. Where did you have the camera pointing when you set the meterinf? If it was at the faces / centre of the frame, then you'll overexpose because of the relatively light background. If you're using A mode, to get metering right for the faces, meter off the lower part of the frame, lock with a half pressure, re-compose and confirm focus and then shoot. If you're in M all you need to do is to set the metering so that it's correct for the lower half of the frame and then re-frame - ignoring any under / over-exposure indication from the red triangles.

 

In my experience, the M9's metering is remarkably accurate.

 

Hope this helps...

[Maximus]

Chris, it was a snap so I just pressed the shutter release.

 

I accept this isn't terribly scientific, but it was just a snap. What I don't understand is why virtually all my shots are dark?

[chris_tribble]

Hi - even if it's a snap it needs to be correctly exposed. Look back over the images. If most of them are backlit (sky behind the subject), I'd strongly advise thinking about your metering technique before you start worrying whether the camera's faulty. Hope this helps.

[jaapv]

In this image it would have been best to go manual and meter off the bottom of the frame, for instance the raincoat.

[lars_bergquist]

If you are on A and you are pointing the center of the frame at something lighter than 18% reflectance when you push the button, you'll have underexposure.

 

If you are on manual and you are pointing the center of the frame at something lighter than 18% reflectance when you balance the meter, you'll get underexposure. And vice versa in both cases, if your metering target is darker than 18%.

 

So where do we find that 18% target? Answer: inside a meter for incident light. Meter the light on the subject, meter pointed in the direction of the camera, and you will have technically correct exposure. Period. Reflected light metering depends completely on the assumption that the reflectasde of the subject is 18%. Sometimes it is. But using an in-camera meter is always playing photographic Russian roulette. Oh well, mostly one of the unloaded chambers turn up under the hammer when it falls, and all is well.

 

On the other hand, sometimes ...

 

The old man from the Age of the Weston Master

[Maximus]

If you are on A and you are pointing the center of the frame at something lighter than 18% reflectance when you push the button, you'll have underexposure.

 

If you are on manual and you are pointing the center of the frame at something lighter than 18% reflectance when you balance the meter, you'll get underexposure. And vice versa in both cases, if your metering target is darker than 18%.

Lars, I understand that. So why are ALL my images under exposed?

[Nikkor AIS]

First of all, I like image. Secondly, On my screen the best exposer is between the two examples you showed. With digital( Nikon D3) I tend to not want loose highlights so exposing a little dark is no problem for me. I think you got nothing to worry about. Post some more samples perhaps that illustrate what you think is the problem. I will say this IMO all camera meters are stupid and should only be a guide to the real decision maker, you.

 

Gregory

[zlatkob]

That photo presents an easy subject for any light meter. There is so little sky in the photo; the subjects are centered and big in the frame; their clothing has a middle tone. I find the meter is usually very good with subjects like this.

 

If nearly all of you images are underexposed, then the meter is very likely out of adjustment. Also, be sure you haven't accidentally set exposure compensation, as mentioned above.

 

P.S. If you open that photo in Photoshop and roughly select the middle part of the photo, the part that the meter measures, and then check the histogram (Command + L to show the levels in PS), it is certainly underexposed. The adjusted photo looks perfect on my computer (as does the histogram of its middle portion).

[rhom]

Hi Maximus,

 

May I please ask which dSLR system you have been using prior to your M9?

 

Thanks,

 

Rick

[diogenis]

Lars, I understand that. So why are ALL my images under exposed?

 

Maximus,

Take one shot fully manual, the way you shoot as normal that is.

Then, either use bracketing, or take the same shot with +1. Then check the histograms.

If what you say is true, you should not see burned spots, or very little when you shoot +1.

Remember: you get the most brightness, when your exposure is close to burn pixels.

 

I find it hard to believe that the meter is off by 1stop, but even if it is, you can counter simply by compensating by that. If you still dont get burns, then you could be right.

 

Edit: Lars, he is right. it is ok if some photos are turned out underexposed, but not if ALL his photos are underexposed. Then either the meter is off, or he thinks his photos are underexposed. We don't want him to change his shooting style.. He can simply compensate.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[adan]

When I first got my M9, I also had the impression that it underexposed about a stop. Both in the computer, and as mentioned in another thread, because the camera LCD made all pictures look dark.

 

However, after dialing in +1 exposure comp in the camera for a couple of weeks, I discovered I was getting a lot of blown skies.

 

I went back to my RAW processor (Adobe Camera Raw) and changed (and saved) the default settings - especially "Brightness" (not "Exposure") - from whatever its default was to +60. And set the camera back to 0 exposure compensation.

 

Now my pix look well exposed when they open in ACR using my own defaults - without the blown highlights.

 

I guess the moral would be - don't assume that the software engineers who wrote your preferred RAW developer program actually picked good defaults. Make sure you have defaults that do what you want with your camera.

 

The film analogy would be - thin negatives may come from a faulty meter, but they may also come from faulty default developing times published by the film maker. One can't assume one or the other without tests.

 

(BTW, I had to do the same resetting of the Brightness default to +60 with my Canon 5D images - so obviously Adobe's idea of good exposure is just - different - than mine.)