lethbrp Posted December 28, 2013 Share #1 Posted December 28, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've looked through every menu option, but I can't seem to find any option that allow you to display the f stop that was used when reviewing the image on the camera. The info screen is somewhat limited on the information it displays, shutter speed, ISO, meter type, lens, but no f stop. I took two consecutive images wit a 90 lens over the weekend and when I imported them into Lightroom, on the EXIF data one showed a f stop of f4 and the other f16. I really don't remember changing the aperture between clicks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 28, 2013 Posted December 28, 2013 Hi lethbrp, Take a look here Info question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
EricC Posted December 28, 2013 Share #2 Posted December 28, 2013 This is because the M does not know the f-stop used, it merely guesses at it with the help of the "brightness sensor" on the front of the camera body to the upper left of the red dot when looking from the front of the camera body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lethbrp Posted December 28, 2013 Author Share #3 Posted December 28, 2013 Really.... So when setting the f stop on the aperture ring, this is just a guess, not a precise f stop? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 28, 2013 Share #4 Posted December 28, 2013 When you set it on the lens it is absolute, but the camera doesn't know what the lens does, there is no mechanical or electrical connection between lens and camera for the selected aperture. The 'round blue eye' on the top left of the camera measures the light, and also through the lens, then it compares both values and guesses the f stop you see in Lightroom for example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricC Posted December 28, 2013 Share #5 Posted December 28, 2013 When you set it on the lens it is absolute, but the camera doesn't know what the lens does, there is no mechanical or electrical connection between lens and camera for the selected aperture. The 'round blue eye' on the top left of the camera measures the light, and also through the lens, then it compares both values and guesses the f stop you see in Lightroom for example. Exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted December 28, 2013 Share #6 Posted December 28, 2013 Exactly. Woah, I didn't know that... and we pay $8000, for an estimate? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted December 28, 2013 Share #7 Posted December 28, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Woah, I didn't know that... and we pay $8000, for an estimate? Yes, but you get a camera with a range finder and a very nice sensor thrown in, all for free. Actually, the aperture is - of course - set quite accurately by turning the ring on the lens. The camera measures the light arriving on the sensor with all the required accuracy and the image is formed exactly as specified. The only thing which is estimated is the setting as recorded in the EXIF data that goes with the image. The reason for this has already been explained here: there is no way to transmit that information from the lens to the camera body. On the "up" side, you can use lenses which are 50 years old or more with that camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 28, 2013 Share #8 Posted December 28, 2013 Woah, I didn't know that... and we pay $8000, for an estimate? I'd rather have Leica's estimates about aperture than a (choose one or more options) mechanics, plumbers, electricians, painter and decorator, or financial consultants estimates regarding their work. At $8000 it seems far less risky. And let's face up to it like men, we've not needed a way for a camera to record apertures for 150 years, so why now when paper and pen can solve any critical needs? Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted December 28, 2013 Share #9 Posted December 28, 2013 Woah, I didn't know that... and we pay $8000, for an estimate? Well, given that the Leica M system hasn't got, and never has had, any aperture coupling mechanism between the lens and the body, how else would you propose they do it? The limitation is inherent in the whole M system, and, if you really can't get on with it, then it has to be said that the M system may not be for you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lethbrp Posted December 28, 2013 Author Share #10 Posted December 28, 2013 Well, given that the Leica M system hasn't got, and never has had, any aperture coupling mechanism between the lens and the body, how else would you propose they do it? The limitation is inherent in the whole M system, and, if you really can't get on with it, then it has to be said that the M system may not be for you. Well it was news to me as I've only just transitioned to Leica from Nikon. I don't think having or not having has anything to do with whether the M system is suitable for me. It is useful when reviewing images taken in the past to be able to know what f stop create a certain depth of field for a given lens at a given distant. Are you able to tell from looking at your archive what f stop you used on any given image? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 28, 2013 Share #11 Posted December 28, 2013 . Are you able to tell from looking at your archive what f stop you used on any given image? Yes, within a stop or so, about the same accuracy as the Leica guess, it's about looking, absorbing, and remembering, rather than having a machine do it for you. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannybuoy Posted December 28, 2013 Share #12 Posted December 28, 2013 And even the estimate the camera makes isn't always right. Most times my photos at 1.4 have 1.7 or 1.8 in the EXIF. It doesn't bother me in the slightest. To be honest I am usually more interested at looking at my excellent photos than worry about the f stop the M felt like selecting :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted December 28, 2013 Share #13 Posted December 28, 2013 : Are you able to tell from looking at your archive what f stop you used on any given image? It's permanently in the exif data and you can get LR5 to show it on the images by going to Develop : View : View Options : tick 'show info overlay' then set what you want in Loupe Info 1 and 2 by choosing from the drop down menus. F stop is one of the choices. If you set both sets you can toggle between them by pressing 'I' ....... It will also show in 'Library' and you can also toggle on/off and info choice with 'I' A similar process shows it in Aperture as well if you set what you want in the 'info' tab. Use Metatdata display : Customise and again choose .... plus tick 'show below image' As above .... bear in mind the F stop is a guesstimate which is usually about right ...... but it can be confused ..... if you inadvertently part cover the 'eye' above the lens etc .......and if you use a ND filter or similar the results will then be way off....... 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/219169-info-question/?do=findComment&comment=2496929'>More sharing options...
masjah Posted December 28, 2013 Share #14 Posted December 28, 2013 Well it was news to me as I've only just transitioned to Leica from Nikon. I don't think having or not having has anything to do with whether the M system is suitable for me. It is useful when reviewing images taken in the past to be able to know what f stop create a certain depth of field for a given lens at a given distant. Are you able to tell from looking at your archive what f stop you used on any given image? No, personally I'm not able to do that, though others may be able so to do. But my point remains - it is an inherent limitation of the M system which has to be accepted. You can do one of two things: either accept the approximate figure which the camera can provide, or keep a record at the time of taking the picture. Neither is perfect, Or, as I said, if you really can't live without a completely accurate camera generated record of aperture information, you've got to go to a different camera system; that's all I meant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lethbrp Posted December 28, 2013 Author Share #15 Posted December 28, 2013 It's permanently in the exif data and you can get LR5 to show it on the images by going to Develop : View : View Options : tick 'show info overlay' then set what you want in Loupe Info 1 and 2 by choosing from the drop down menus. F stop is one of the choices. If you set both sets you can toggle between them by pressing 'I' ....... It will also show in 'Library' and you can also toggle on/off and info choice with 'I' A similar process shows it in Aperture as well if you set what you want in the 'info' tab. Use Metatdata display : Customise and again choose .... plus tick 'show below image' As above .... bear in mind the F stop is a guesstimate which is usually about right ...... but it can be confused ..... if you inadvertently part cover the 'eye' above the lens etc .......and if you use a ND filter or similar the results will then be way off....... A useful tip about the 'eye'. It was certainly off on the image I took at f4 and it recorded at f16. I must have inadvertantly covered the eye. I'm still getting used to holding the camera correctly, it only arrived on Friday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted December 29, 2013 Share #16 Posted December 29, 2013 No, personally I'm not able to do that, though others may be able so to do. But my point remains - it is an inherent limitation of the M system which has to be accepted. You can do one of two things: either accept the approximate figure which the camera can provide, or keep a record at the time of taking the picture. Neither is perfect, Or, as I said, if you really can't live without a completely accurate camera generated record of aperture information, you've got to go to a different camera system; that's all I meant. I too Transitioned from Film and Canon to Leica, your previous comment saying its not for me having already owned one and didn't know that there was no coupling between the lens and the body is insulting and why so many Leica users said not to get one - not for the camera, but for the "brain washing" fans tell each other. WHO said I have to endure it? Why is it a limitation when it costs 4 times as much as a full frame DSLR? Doesn't that mean it should be cheaper? "accept it" is and never should be an excuse, especially when there is little to no literature about it as a new customer. Its not a be all and end all complaint from me, but a critical comment on a company that suggests prestige. And its starting to make more and more sense to me now that my Leica buddies were advising me against getting one because all they do is try to prevent each other from "sounding like a leica fan" and why Im happy to be openly critical. Its a real shame the ONLY excuse people here can come up with about my opinion is "that's just how it is" or "accept it," or "its not for you" which further makes me realise that Leica almost died because of JUST that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 29, 2013 Share #17 Posted December 29, 2013 It is wel documented that there is no mechanical or electrical connection between lens and camera concerning data transfer... Meaning, the only thing the lens does is use a bayonet style mount to lock to the camera, and push the focus roll/lever inside the camera... That's all it does... And of course letting light in So you just have to accept it or buy another camera, that's not some fan talk. That's the truth. If you want features like Accurate f stop in your exif etc etc, then the digital M is not for you. ... You can't expect them to make it happen because some are not happy with the estimate aperture... Meaning they would have to create another mechanical way to transfer data from lens to camera, making the camera and lenses less 'long living' probably... Just so people can read the exact aperture... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 29, 2013 Share #18 Posted December 29, 2013 Just to add: as you probably already know with Leica you PAY for LESS. While with canikon you PAY for MORE. So if you want more features give your money to Canikon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 29, 2013 Share #19 Posted December 29, 2013 I too Transitioned from Film and Canon to Leica, your previous comment saying its not for me having already owned one and didn't know that there was no coupling between the lens and the body is insulting and why so many Leica users said not to get one - not for the camera, but for the "brain washing" fans tell each other. WHO said I have to endure it? Why is it a limitation when it costs 4 times as much as a full frame DSLR? Doesn't that mean it should be cheaper? "accept it" is and never should be an excuse, especially when there is little to no literature about it as a new customer. Its not a be all and end all complaint from me, but a critical comment on a company that suggests prestige. And its starting to make more and more sense to me now that my Leica buddies were advising me against getting one because all they do is try to prevent each other from "sounding like a leica fan" and why Im happy to be openly critical. Its a real shame the ONLY excuse people here can come up with about my opinion is "that's just how it is" or "accept it," or "its not for you" which further makes me realise that Leica almost died because of JUST that. In that case maybe you could suggest a way the a lens without any coupling of the aperture as is does not need one should communicate with the body? I think the estimation Leica hasimplemented is the best one can get - given the technical parameters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted December 29, 2013 Share #20 Posted December 29, 2013 I too Transitioned from Film and Canon to Leica, your previous comment saying its not for me having already owned one and didn't know that there was no coupling between the lens and the body is insulting and why so many Leica users said not to get one - not for the camera, but for the "brain washing" fans tell each other. WHO said I have to endure it? Why is it a limitation when it costs 4 times as much as a full frame DSLR? Doesn't that mean it should be cheaper? "accept it" is and never should be an excuse, especially when there is little to no literature about it as a new customer. Its not a be all and end all complaint from me, but a critical comment on a company that suggests prestige. And its starting to make more and more sense to me now that my Leica buddies were advising me against getting one because all they do is try to prevent each other from "sounding like a leica fan" and why Im happy to be openly critical. Its a real shame the ONLY excuse people here can come up with about my opinion is "that's just how it is" or "accept it," or "its not for you" which further makes me realise that Leica almost died because of JUST that. Leonil, the last thing I intended to be is offensive or insulting; if I phrased my remarks with an unfortunate emphasis in the wrong places, then of course I apologise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.