Jump to content

Leica M - Exposure Compensation Issues


hugo

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I understand that for others pressing button #3 is difficult to use. And, that pressing button #3 + turning the wheel is even more difficult. That is one discussion and it is certainly up to each to decide if they like the implementation of the ergonomics.

 

We even understand that you feel that Leica has not implemented these things well.

 

Wilson - I don't think it is quite fair to intimate that I am not sensitive to other's challenges. I believe, I directly acknowledged others difficulties in my posts above.

 

But, since you brought it up again, I will say again, I happen to like both the placement and the recessed nature of the button. For me the ergonomics is excellent.

 

I also believe the choice that Leica made in requiring a button push and a turn of the dial works much better for me. I never enabled this feature because it was too easy to inadvertently turn the dial on the M9 and end up with ruined photos. The implementation on the M is much better.

 

So, we will just have to disagree on whether or not Leica has "implement this mode in an ergonomically satisfactory fashion."

Edited by RickLeica
Link to post
Share on other sites

But, These two methods of controlling exposure are different. One is manual control of exposure, the other (eV comp.) is meant to impart a bias to compensate for the inherent problems present in all auto exposure systems.

 

In other words one is exposure control the other is meant to compensate the meter's choice of exposure settings. The formers gives the user complete creative control of exposure the later leaves the exposure choice to the camera and tries to use a bias to make up for incorrect choices made my the camera electronics for a variety of reasons.

 

RIck, you make a distinction without a difference. Do you use the meter to determine where to set your shutter speed (once you have set your aperture)? So does the camera's auto exposure. So what is the difference? In one, you use the meter reading to set the shutter speed. In the other, the camera uses the meter reading to set the shutter speed. How is one really different than the other?

 

If you are using the meter to decide where to set your shutter speed, and there is a strong backlight to the scene, do you adjust your shutter speed differently than what the meter tells you in order to compensate for that backlight? Voila, you have just used a manual form of exposure compensation using the shutter speed dial. That is no different than doing the same thing using the exposure compensation dial.

 

With up to three stops of exposure compensation above and below the metered exposure, most scenes can be handled easily without having to resort to manually adjusting the shutter speed, and with the photographer still having complete creative control at the turn of a dial. The only difference being that, as I have said now three times, the photographer actually has slightly more precise creative control with exposure comp., because you can adjust in 1/3 stop increments rather than full stops. Other than that, there is no difference from a functional or creative perspective, between full manual using the camera's meter and aperture priority using exposure compensation to adjust for the lighting. Either way, the photographer makes the final decision on what the exposure should be in relation to what the meter says it should be.

 

How we chose to control exposure has little to do with us liking simplicity. That is an idea of yours not mine. It has nothing to do with getting over the fact that the M is no longer a film camera. That is condescending and holds no logic.

 

I'm sorry. That comment was not directed at you so much as to certain other members. Seems every time someone complains about Leica changing something on the M vs. the M9 (i.e. exposure comp., bracketing), certain members tell them they should forget about using these modes and do it manually. Kind of like certain people chastising others for using the M on a tripod, because they are convinced that "the M is not a tripod camera!" (Gee, then why did Leica put a tripod mount on it?) To me, those kinds of comments are condescending and hold no logic. That is what my comment was directed at. Bottom line for me is: If a function was well-implemented on the M9 and lots of people use it and rely on it, I would expect Leica to continue to implement it properly on the M unless there is a good reason not to.

 

I do understand the distinction you are trying to make between full manual exposure control vs. using aperture priority auto-exposure mode and the exposure compensation wheel, but honestly I believe there is no practical difference between the two. I have used both with numerous cameras and have found exposure compensation the easier and quicker way to get the exposure I want. I set the aperture (based usually upon depth of field and sharpness considerations), halfway press the shutter button, the meter sets the shutter speed, and I look at the scene and lighting and decide whether I want to adjust this metered shutter setting and by how much. If I do, then I turn the exposure comp. wheel in the appropriate direction, then snap the shutter. Picture taken and photographer is still in complete creative control. Really no difference between that and using the meter and the shutter speed knob to set the exposure, compensating when the lighting is fooling the meter by setting a higher or lower shutter speed than the meter is calling for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we will just have to disagree on whether or not Leica has "implement this mode in an ergonomically satisfactory fashion."

 

Couldn't we just agree that Leica giving you the choice in a menu setting whether to have to push a button or not to use exposure compensation would be a much more satisfactory answer for everyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

RIck, you make a distinction without a difference. Do you use the meter to determine where to set your shutter speed (once you have set your aperture)? So does the camera's auto exposure. So what is the difference? In one, you use the meter reading to set the shutter speed. In the other, the camera uses the meter reading to set the shutter speed. How is one really different than the other?

 

If you are using the meter to decide where to set your shutter speed, and there is a strong backlight to the scene, do you adjust your shutter speed differently than what the meter tells you in order to compensate for that backlight? Voila, you have just used a manual form of exposure compensation using the shutter speed dial. That is no different than doing the same thing using the exposure compensation dial.

 

With up to three stops of exposure compensation above and below the metered exposure, most scenes can be handled easily without having to resort to manually adjusting the shutter speed, and with the photographer still having complete creative control at the turn of a dial. The only difference being that, as I have said now three times, the photographer actually has slightly more precise creative control with exposure comp., because you can adjust in 1/3 stop increments rather than full stops. Other than that, there is no difference from a functional or creative perspective, between full manual using the camera's meter and aperture priority using exposure compensation to adjust for the lighting. Either way, the photographer makes the final decision on what the exposure should be in relation to what the meter says it should be.

 

 

 

I'm sorry. That comment was not directed at you so much as to certain other members. Seems every time someone complains about Leica changing something on the M vs. the M9 (i.e. exposure comp., bracketing), certain members tell them they should forget about using these modes and do it manually. Kind of like certain people chastising others for using the M on a tripod, because they are convinced that "the M is not a tripod camera!" (Gee, then why did Leica put a tripod mount on it?) To me, those kinds of comments are condescending and hold no logic. That is what my comment was directed at. Bottom line for me is: If a function was well-implemented on the M9 and lots of people use it and rely on it, I would expect Leica to continue to implement it properly on the M unless there is a good reason not to.

 

I do understand the distinction you are trying to make between full manual exposure control vs. using aperture priority auto-exposure mode and the exposure compensation wheel, but honestly I believe there is no practical difference between the two. I have used both with numerous cameras and have found exposure compensation the easier and quicker way to get the exposure I want. I set the aperture (based usually upon depth of field and sharpness considerations), halfway press the shutter button, the meter sets the shutter speed, and I look at the scene and lighting and decide whether I want to adjust this metered shutter setting and by how much. If I do, then I turn the exposure comp. wheel in the appropriate direction, then snap the shutter. Picture taken and photographer is still in complete creative control. Really no difference between that and using the meter and the shutter speed knob to set the exposure, compensating when the lighting is fooling the meter by setting a higher or lower shutter speed than the meter is calling for.

 

You are completely missing the point that eV is "compensation" to the choice made by the camera's electronics.

 

In your example, if the backlight (let's say bright sky) is causing the camera to underexpose and as in your example I adjust the shutter speed to expose for a different part of the photo, I can likely reframe and shoot something completely different in that direction and my exposure stays the same - what I chose.

 

Still using your example, if you reset the eV, to correct for the bright sky, and you reframe to include even a little more sky, for example, your camera may chose a wildly different exposure and your eV compensation may be incorrect now. Of course, you can choose to chase the camera's auto exposure all day long with the little thumb wheel if, this is what you really want.

 

But, to state that, "Really no difference between that and using the meter and the shutter speed knob to set the exposure," is not at all correct.

Edited by RickLeica
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't we just agree that Leica giving you the choice in a menu setting whether to have to push a button or not to use exposure compensation would be a much more satisfactory answer for everyone?

 

Again, I never stated that Leica should not give choices to those that want something different. You're putting words in my mouth and the wrong ones.;)

Edited by RickLeica
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In your example, if the backlight (let's say bright sky) is causing the camera to underexpose and as in your example I adjust the shutter speed to expose for a different part of the photo, I can likely reframe and shoot something completely different in that direction and my exposure stays the same - what I chose.

 

Still using your example, if you reset the eV, to correct for the bright sky, and you reframe to include even a little more sky, for example, your camera may chose a wildly different exposure and your eV compensation may be incorrect now. Of course, you can choose to chase the camera's auto exposure all day long with the little thumb wheel if, this is what you really want.

 

But, to state that, "Really no difference between that and using the meter and the shutter speed knob to set the exposure," is not at all correct.

 

I understand the point you are trying to make, and I won't belabor it. I just don't find it to be an issue in practice. I really don't think there is any practical difference shooting the way you do vs. the way I do.

 

And if, under the circumstances you pose above, I don't want to "chase the camera's auto exposure with the wheel," I can always point the camera at the thing I want to expose for (the foreground, in our example) and use exposure lock to ensure I get the correctly metered reading, rather than using exposure compensation. Just another way for the photographer to arrive at the correct exposure using the camera's meter and autoexposure ability.

 

Again, I never stated that Leica should not give choices to those that want something different. You're putting words in my mouth and the wrong ones.

 

How is asking you a question putting words in your mouth?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here is my super-hitech solution to the EV/Focus/Zoom control issue. A self adhesive clear polyurethane button. It works brilliantly. The surface is very slightly tacky and immediately gives your finger a reference for the correct location. It also helps my damaged fingers with depressing the button. From more than a few inches away, you can hardly see the button. If someone decides they don't like it, it is easy to peel off and most importantly it is CHEAP. Here is the Fleabay link if anyone else wants to buy some. The 6.4mm size is actually about 5mm in diameter and is a near perfect fit. Self Adhesive Polyurethane Bumper Feet Hemispherical Various Sizes- Pack of 12 | eBay

 

Wilson

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a further quick thought. If some us like me, think the unmodified button is difficult to depress now, wait until the MF grip is fitted. If you have a look at the photo below, I have the feeling that unless you have 20cm long triple articulated fingers, pressing this button will be close to impossible. The stick on polyurethane dot will help but it is still not going to be easy.

 

Wilson

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

Well here is my super-hitech solution to the EV/Focus/Zoom control issue. A self adhesive clear polyurethane button. It works brilliantly. The surface is very slightly tacky and immediately gives your finger a reference for the correct location. It also helps my damaged fingers with depressing the button. From more than a few inches away, you can hardly see the button. If someone decides they don't like it, it is easy to peel off and most importantly it is CHEAP. Here is the Fleabay link if anyone else wants to buy some. The 6.4mm size is actually about 5mm in diameter and is a near perfect fit. Self Adhesive Polyurethane Bumper Feet Hemispherical Various Sizes- Pack of 12 | eBay

 

Wilson

 

Thank you, Winston! I will give that a try. Is that your WATE on board? Certainly a lens that invites exposure compensation :)

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Winston! I will give that a try. Is that your WATE on board? Certainly a lens that invites exposure compensation :)

 

Peter

 

Not a WATE but a MATE. I had a WATE as well but rarely used it. I swapped it for a 28 Summicron ASPH and cash. For an extra wide I use a CV 15 Super Wide Heliar but until the FW is updated, the red edges are pretty ugly on the M240 or you have to correct with a lens template in C1.

 

WILSON (not Winston)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...