"Clipping Definition"

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all,

 

I'm giving the M240 a second try and have been shooting with it the past few days (50LuxASPH + Elmarit 90/2.8 last version, both 6 bit coded and checked by Wetzlar last week)

 

All is good but the camera severely overexposed - even when I limit the ISO to pull 100, set the aperture to f5.6 and a reasonable shutter speed ranging between 250 and 500

 

I then into the settings and found "Clipping Definition"

 

A search on this forum came up with just one thread that seems to have been reduced to nothing useful so I need input from you guys

 

 

1. Is this over exposure problem specific to my camera?

2. If not, what do you guys do to mitigate?

3. What is "clipping definition" and have you guys changed the lower/upper values?

4. If yes, what are the optimum values?

5. Any hinted dates when the new firmware is due? I can already answer this myself as "NO" but the optimist in me ventured out on a limb and a prayer

 

 

Thanks in advance,

Hari

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[mjh]

ISO 100 overexposes by one stop; that’s what ‘pull’ means. But there there should be no overexposure at ISO 200 (the sensor’s native sensitivity). If you could show us some examples we might be able to shed some light on this issue. And since you mention specific shutter speeds: did the camera indicate that these settings would result in a correct exposure?

[epand56]

This is strange, I find my Leica M capable of an incredible amount of tones and it is almost impossible to me to have white overexposed areas in the pictures. Just happened in some of those impossible deep-shadows-strong-light pictures. I found quite easy finding the correct exposure in pictures in which was quite difficult to expose.

[Echo63]

The "clipping defnition" adjusts whete the red and blue blinkies show up in playback.

 

If you look at an image you have taken, and press the info button a few times it will show histograms, other info and in one of the screens, will put a red blinking colour on overexposed (white) areas, and a blue blinking area on the underexposed (black) areas

The "clipping definition" allows you to adjust how early or late these start (how over or underexposed the area needs to be before it starts) mine is set to default values.

 

heres an example of the playback that shows the red highlight clipping warning and the blue shadow clipping warning.

my black clipping shows up at "2" so a very dark grey, not quite black, and the hilight clipping shows up at 253, so a little bit before the highlights blow out completely and become white.

thats all your "clipping definition" does (i actually really appreciate Leica implementing the ability to adjust the points for the warning, and having the underexposure warning too, i wish Canon would implement the same)

 

in the pic below the red is a white patch open in PS on my laptop screen, the blue to the right is actually a dark grey jacket sitting on the bed

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!

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

ISO 100 overexposes by one stop; that’s what ‘pull’ means. But there there should be no overexposure at ISO 200 (the sensor’s native sensitivity). If you could show us some examples we might be able to shed some light on this issue. And since you mention specific shutter speeds: did the camera indicate that these settings would result in a correct exposure?

 

 

My bad to not have shared some images already

 

I shoot in DNG, converted to JPG via LR 5.0 and made no further changes

 

I also notice the camera tends to pick very low shutter speeds in excellent light conditions leading to blurred images

 

All shots at f5.6 / f8 / f11 / f16

 

Uploaded to my Flickr in bigger sizes so we can look at the issue and see what the fix could be ->

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14179679240/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14179714820/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14179683138/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14365414124/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14362999141/sizes/o/

 

To return to a normal view, simply delete "/sizes/o/"

 

Many Thanks for the help

 

Hari

[LocalHero1953]

The first three look like what I might expect, given the difficult (high contrast and bright) conditions.

The third looks like flare (shooting into the sun). This is normal.

The fourth looks a bit over exposed, but again may be because of the high contrast and bright lighting.

The blurring in the fifth is obviously wrong. What aperture, shutter speed and ISO does the metadata show?

I suggest you do some tests comparing auto exposure performance against manual. And, to reduce uncertainty, I suggest you choose a more evenly lit scene.

[flyalf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My bad to not have shared some images already

 

I shoot in DNG, converted to JPG via LR 5.0 and made no further changes

 

I also notice the camera tends to pick very low shutter speeds in excellent light conditions leading to blurred images

 

All shots at f5.6 / f8 / f11 / f16

 

Uploaded to my Flickr in bigger sizes so we can look at the issue and see what the fix could be ->

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14179679240/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14179714820/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14179683138/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14365414124/sizes/o/

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/14362999141/sizes/o/

 

To return to a normal view, simply delete "/sizes/o/"

 

Many Thanks for the help

 

Hari

 

Hi,

 

As far as I can see the files are "normally" exposed. Please remember that exposure also depends on metering mode choosen. You need to learn how M exposes under differemt comditions and adjust accordingly, or even better learn to meter and expose manual.

 

Of course the camera chooses lower shutter speeds for smaller apertures, how else could it do the same exposure (same amount of light) without adjusting ISO? You can chosse a higher ISO to get shorter exposure times.

 

For photos with very high contrast you will have to choose if you want to save the highlights or darker areas by compensating exposure. Remember that the camera can only capture a part of the dynamic range in such photos. Some can be improved in LR. For example try to adjust the second photo by decreasing contrast (-30), highlights (-90), whites (-70), and increase shadows (+90) and Blacks (+60). All suggested values are aprox and depends on your prefernces.

 

Might I aøsp suggest a quick course in basic metering and photography? Please dont feel offended but to understand the M you need to know how the 4 basic parameters work: shutter speed, aperture, ISO for exposure, focus and aperture for focus/DoF, and ISO/exposure for noise and dynamic range.

[pop]

It all depends on the kind of Auto Exposure you select. With the "classic" mode the camera measures the light which is reflected by the bright area in the middle of the shutter curtain. It then sets the exposure value such that this part of the image is rendered in a "medium" average brightness. I presume it aims for something like 18% grey.

 

If there is a great contrast within the area used for measuring the exposure, you're out of luck and the brightest part of the image are clipped. If there are very bright or very dark portions in the image but not within the area seen by the exposure meter, they will be invisible to the exposure meter and also clipped.

 

In situation similar to your #1 and #2 I often set the Exposure Correction to -1EV or even less. Some of the members here frown upon that practice as they get better results with manual metering. Some of the more advanced metering methods made possible by live view also could be helpful, but I have never used those so I can not give any useful advice concerning those.

[Rick]

Hi all,

 

I'm giving the M240 a second try and have been shooting with it the past few days (50LuxASPH + Elmarit 90/2.8 last version, both 6 bit coded and checked by Wetzlar last week)

 

All is good but the camera severely overexposed - even when I limit the ISO to pull 100, set the aperture to f5.6 and a reasonable shutter speed ranging between 250 and 500

 

I then into the settings and found "Clipping Definition"

 

A search on this forum came up with just one thread that seems to have been reduced to nothing useful so I need input from you guys

 

 

1. Is this over exposure problem specific to my camera?

No, your camera is fine. Try manual exposure if you want to "expose" to your liking. The camera (any camera) has no idea what you want the exposure to be.

2. If not, what do you guys do to mitigate?

Manual.

3. What is "clipping definition" and have you guys changed the lower/upper values?

Experiment with this and set it to what you want. Then ignore it.

4. If yes, what are the optimum values?

Again, experiment and set it to what will work for you.

5. Any hinted dates when the new firmware is due? I can already answer this myself as "NO" but the optimist in me ventured out on a limb and a prayer

As Andreas has stated, Beta testing is underway and the new firmware will follow shortly.

 

 

Thanks in advance,

Hari

 

Hope this helps. The blue type is only to set-off my response. I have no delusions of being a moderator nor do I wish to take on this thankless task.

[farnz]

Hari,

 

The telling point for me is the fifth link you posted where the picture is blurred. The exposure across the scene looks roughly right ie the are no obviously blown highlights and no over-dense shadows. So for the camera to have selected a slow shutter speed that caused the blur on such a well lit day either the aperture must have been somewhere around f/16 or you were using a high value neutral density filter. If the aperture ring on your lens was set to a larger aperture and you weren't using a ND filter then it might be worthwhile checking that the linkages are correctly operating the shutter blades on that lens.

 

Pete.

[ayewing]

Hari,

 

The telling point for me is the fifth link you posted where the picture is blurred. The exposure across the scene looks roughly right ie the are no obviously blown highlights and no over-dense shadows. So for the camera to have selected a slow shutter speed that caused the blur on such a well lit day either the aperture must have been somewhere around f/16 or you were using a high value neutral density filter. If the aperture ring on your lens was set to a larger aperture and you weren't using a ND filter then it might be worthwhile checking that the linkages are correctly operating the shutter blades on that lens.

 

Pete.

 

 

The Exif confirms that the aperture was f/16, shutter speed 1/45, ISO 320, FL 50mm so Pete's explanation is probably correct though the blurring seems rather extreme as if the camera was panning.

[JeffWright]

Hi,

 

As far as I can see the files are "normally" exposed. Please remember that exposure also depends on metering mode choosen. You need to learn how M exposes under differemt comditions and adjust accordingly, or even better learn to meter and expose manual.

 

Of course the camera chooses lower shutter speeds for smaller apertures, how else could it do the same exposure (same amount of light) without adjusting ISO? You can chosse a higher ISO to get shorter exposure times.

 

For photos with very high contrast you will have to choose if you want to save the highlights or darker areas by compensating exposure. Remember that the camera can only capture a part of the dynamic range in such photos. Some can be improved in LR. For example try to adjust the second photo by decreasing contrast (-30), highlights (-90), whites (-70), and increase shadows (+90) and Blacks (+60). All suggested values are aprox and depends on your prefernces.

 

Might I aøsp suggest a quick course in basic metering and photography? Please dont feel offended but to understand the M you need to know how the 4 basic parameters work: shutter speed, aperture, ISO for exposure, focus and aperture for focus/DoF, and ISO/exposure for noise and dynamic range.

 

You might take a look at some of God Particle's other work before suggesting a course in 'basic' photography. He has posted some of the most stunning images I've seen on this forum and others, here's an example from the Monochrom, http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/29/amysegys.jpg (which pretty much requires that you nail exposure).

 

To the OP, I find that if I meter an 18% grey card, my Typ 240 correlates perfectly with my Sekonic light meter. In high contrast scenes, I often wind up underexposing by about 1/3 to 1/2 stop to avoid blowing highlights.

[pgk]

Hari

 

Can I suggest that before doing anything else you try shooting some lower contrast, mid-tone subjects at mid aperture to see where the exposure lies on these - in fact ideally a grey card. This will indicate whether or not your meter is acting correctly and its essential to shoot the appropriate subject matter to determine an accurate meter before shooting high contrast subjects which are far more difficult to assess.

[epand56]

I'm very satisfied with the M 240 exposure.

This is a quite difficult picture to take, full sun at 2 pm and people in the shadow:

 

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!

 

It was taken at 100 ISO with a Summicron C 40/2. I thought anything in the direct sun light would have been clipped, in particular the path in the background. On the countrary you can even see some of the gravel on its surface.

[genefama]

I find that my M240 overexposes in the highlights (with "highlights " defined as caucasian skin tones and lighter). The dynamic range of the camera is wider than the M9, but not in highlights. Highlights blow out easily, so any area of bright daylight peeking into an otherwise shaded scene, like for instance light from between branches hitting a shaded sidewalk, stick out like a sore thumb and are often unrecoverable. Pulling back the highlights in post often just produces muddy-red blotches.

 

It's particularly bad where it counts most for me: skin-tones. A photo can look normally exposed but the subjects' faces will be too hot with limited tonal range. This makes me wonder if it's worse in some color channels than in others, because the images tend to have a warmish cast in general, regardless of correct white balancing—a yellowish or orange bias, which might suggest the sensitivity to these hues is higher.

 

The M240 is the first camera I've had that benefits from shooting to the left of the histogram.

[digitalfx]

As Michael pointed out ISO100 limits the dynamic range. I never shoot at 1SO 100, use an ND Filter instead. The examples you posted look typical for uncontrolled auto exposure. Either try M mode or use exposure lock in A mode. Overall I find the exposures in the M to be exactly as they should be.

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

Thank you all for the inputs and suggestions

 

Having spent a week with the camera, I've got a decent hang of the menu/options/settings and how to process the files

 

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

5.

 

6.

 

7.

 

8.

 

9.

 

10.

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

5.

 

6.

 

7.

 

8.

 

9.

 

10.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

Hi,

 

As far as I can see the files are "normally" exposed. Please remember that exposure also depends on metering mode choosen. You need to learn how M exposes under differemt comditions and adjust accordingly, or even better learn to meter and expose manual.

 

Of course the camera chooses lower shutter speeds for smaller apertures, how else could it do the same exposure (same amount of light) without adjusting ISO? You can chosse a higher ISO to get shorter exposure times.

 

For photos with very high contrast you will have to choose if you want to save the highlights or darker areas by compensating exposure. Remember that the camera can only capture a part of the dynamic range in such photos. Some can be improved in LR. For example try to adjust the second photo by decreasing contrast (-30), highlights (-90), whites (-70), and increase shadows (+90) and Blacks (+60). All suggested values are aprox and depends on your prefernces.

 

Might I aøsp suggest a quick course in basic metering and photography? Please dont feel offended but to understand the M you need to know how the 4 basic parameters work: shutter speed, aperture, ISO for exposure, focus and aperture for focus/DoF, and ISO/exposure for noise and dynamic range.

 

Thank you for taking the time to share your suggestion

 

If you think those images were correctly exposed, I sincerely recommend you to take the quick course in basic metering and photography.

 

Please dont take offense at my suggestion, i just posted some images having adjusted the camera settings to what i think they should be and some basic processing via LightRoom. The images speak for themselves, until and unless you think they're crap which is also fair as it's a matter of taste.

 

Happy Shooting,

Hari

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

It all depends on the kind of Auto Exposure you select. With the "classic" mode the camera measures the light which is reflected by the bright area in the middle of the shutter curtain. It then sets the exposure value such that this part of the image is rendered in a "medium" average brightness. I presume it aims for something like 18% grey.

 

If there is a great contrast within the area used for measuring the exposure, you're out of luck and the brightest part of the image are clipped. If there are very bright or very dark portions in the image but not within the area seen by the exposure meter, they will be invisible to the exposure meter and also clipped.

 

In situation similar to your #1 and #2 I often set the Exposure Correction to -1EV or even less. Some of the members here frown upon that practice as they get better results with manual metering. Some of the more advanced metering methods made possible by live view also could be helpful, but I have never used those so I can not give any useful advice concerning those.

 

You nailed it

 

The camera was set to Multi Field Metering (probably by myself), i changed it to Spot and set the Exposure Correction to -1EV and it now gives me the results i want.