Jump to content

M9 constantly underexposes

Maximus

By Maximus
in Leica M9 / M-E

Recommended Posts

wilfredo

wilfredo

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maximus,

 

This thread seems to be an endless sea of technical information dancing around denial. It would appear that the M9 in question under-exposes, period! I have no such problems with my M8.

 

My original M8 had an issue for which technical and endless possibilities were offered on this forum (Leica User Forum). I think there is a tendency among some of us to deny that anything can possibly be wrong with a Leica, but the great proverbial happens, regardless of price. In the end, Leica replaced my camera after two repair attempts. If you are not satisfied with setting the meter so it does not under-expose, send the camera back to Leica, and get to the bottom of this problem. What is the point of endless speculation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
x
  • Replies 148
  • Created
  • Last Reply
mby

mby

Posted
Posted
Wilfredo, as much as I'm extremely grateful for all the responses, I have to agree.

 

I've owned cameras for 35 years and yet this is the first that under-exposes every time.

 

Dear Maximus,

 

Let us know what Leica CS is saying.

 

Still for scientific reasons, I'd be interested in taking a look at a raw .DNG file directly from your camera; would you mind posting one?

 

Good luck and best regards,

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
mby

mby

Posted
Posted
If you look at the screenshot I posted of photoMe itbdoes show the relevant data Maybe you missed an update.

 

Sure, but what we saw went through PS CS3 and is now with the strange exposure correction of -1/3, would be nice to look at the RAW how it came from the SD card...

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

Mine was directly from the card. Only copied it through ImageIngester.Here is one from today:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jamie Roberts

Jamie Roberts

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wilfredo, as much as I'm extremely grateful for all the responses, I have to agree.

 

I've owned cameras for 35 years and yet this is the first that under-exposes every time.

 

And were you your own darkroom and printer as well?

 

Film has many stops of latitude, and unless you were looking at the negs as closely as you're looking at your DNGs, you'd never know whether your meter was off by a stop. The printer / lab would have handled that for you, sorry.

 

In fact, all cameras are a bit different (and most films). Hence the old (and still good) advice on a separate meter comparison.

 

Now, will you confirm as well that you had negative exposure compensation on the original file you posted?

 

Can you post a DNG as well? It would be nice to see the original. You can use Yousendit.com to post a large file.

 

If not, I think the conversation is done. But just because you haven't "seen" it in the past doesn't mean it wasn't there :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maximus

Maximus

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Now, will you confirm as well that you had negative exposure compensation on the original file you posted?

Yes I had -1/3 dialled in by accident. I have now removed the ability to adjust this via the Setting Dial only as it was happening too often.

 

I'll post the full RAW file later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mby

mby

Posted
Posted
Mine was directly from the card. Only copied it through ImageIngester.Here is one from today:

 

Apologies for the misunderstanding Jaap, I was referring to Maximus' picture and not yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SJP

SJP

Posted
Posted
If you look at the screenshot I posted of photoMe itbdoes show the relevant data Maybe you missed an update.
I was checking an M8 file as the DXO ISO data seem different between M8 and M9, I am sure I have the latest photoME version and checked with "check updates". Maybe you can check a M8 DNG file?
Link to post
Share on other sites
charlesphoto99

charlesphoto99

Posted
Posted

I find mine tends to often underexpose as well. It may be a Lightroom issue or most likely due to the spot- ish nature of the M9 meter. Doesn't bother me as I would rather be a bit under than over and over time getting better at adjusting. I do occasionaly use auto mode and in general light it can be quite good but easily tricked in difficult light.

 

Too many variables involved for people to figure out these sorts of problems virtually. Best to test test and test some more. Or send back and try another.

 

Best of luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mjh

mjh

Posted
Posted
M8 files don't give the value - must have to do with compression. It does give baseline noise : 1

In DNGs taken with the M9 it makes no difference whether the raw data is compressed; BaselineExposure is –1.5 for ISO 80 and –0.5 for the other ISO values in either case. But indeed the M8 (also the M8.2) doesn’t record BaselineExposure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ho_co

ho_co

Posted
Posted
... I'd recommend ExifTool by Phil Harvey, it's also available for Mac...

 

... indeed the M8 (also the M8.2) doesn’t record BaselineExposure.

 

Thanks to both of you for the information.

 

A gentle caveat: This is all interesting technical information, but meaningless for general picture taking.

 

We never had data displays to tell us how our analog cameras were tweaked (with pots?) to get the exposure the manufacturer thought was 'right,' and different brands would give different readouts but still give good exposure.

 

In other words, if you're getting good exposure, you're fine; if not, you dial in correction just as you used to do, and get on about shooting.

 

 

To my eye, the image Maximus posted shows more than the third-stop underexposure he had apparently set. In this case, it's reasonable to have Leica check the camera. Then work from there. "Alles Andere ist Schall und Rauch." (I'd be a bit cautious about "umnebelnd Himmelsglut." ;) )

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maximus

Maximus

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I've spent quite a lot of time since I started this thread reviewing my M9 pictures and comparing them with those shot by my 1DsMkIII, 5DMkII, G10 and GF1. There is no doubt at all that on average my M9 will under-expose by around 2/3 stop compared to the other cameras. The image I posted in this thread was darker still because, as stated earlier, it is quite easy to accidentally set exposure compensation on the M9 (which I had done by -1/3), unless you restrict that operation to the "Set" menu only.

 

It is irritating that all my other cameras seem to meter scenes more accurately and I am still confused as to whether this is an M9 issue or whether my M9 meter does need calibration. For now, I'll set exposure to +2/3, but that really is a quick and dirty fix and with equipment of this quality I should not have to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

I find it hard to compare matrix systems with centre-weighed. For a fair comparison you should go to manual on the M9 and do a matrix-like spot metering evaluation of the scene.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maximus

Maximus

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I find it hard to compare matrix systems with centre-weighed. For a fair comparison you should go to manual on the M9 and do a matrix-like spot metering evaluation of the scene.

I find it easy to compare centre-weighted metering that results in under-exposure every time with matrix metering that doesn't. If the centre-weighted meter produced both under and over exposed results then you would have a point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...