FMB Posted April 21, 2016 Share #1 Posted April 21, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry to appear again out of the general Post about questions and answers of SL camera, I must have been so cryptic or so ignorant that nobody has taking account of my question Posted 18 April 2016 - 18:57 Some help please,How do you manage "Auto ISO limit values"?If I follow my own interpretation things do not work, if I put mínimum 50 it works as before: very well. May be I’ll be better understood if I ask how to use mínimum ISO?I thought this mínimum ISO would establish a range among the values Minimum/Maximum along that the Auto ISO could run, but or my camera doesn't work well or I don’t understand anything about mínimum ISO. Repeat: can you help me?Thank you. Francisco Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 Hi FMB, Take a look here How to use MINIMUM ISO?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter Walker Posted April 21, 2016 Share #2 Posted April 21, 2016 You will need to be more specific if you want someone to help. What do you mean by "my camera doesn't work well"? That's too general to understand. Please describe what you tried to do and the symptoms that you saw. Regards Peter http://www.peterwalker.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted April 21, 2016 Share #3 Posted April 21, 2016 Francisco, I use manual lenses and have Auto ISO set for minimum 100 and maximum 12500. The camera is in A mode most of the time, but sometimes in M mode. The camera keeps to the lower and upper limits in both. There is no signal, however, if you have exceeded the lower or upper limit and it is possible in those circumstances to over or underexpose because the camera has run out of ISO room. I am not sure what you are trying to do, so perhaps clarify. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 22, 2016 Author Share #4 Posted April 22, 2016 Thank you both.Ok I put for instance, in A mode Auto ISO Mini: 200 and Max 3200 and 1/125 sec then the camera doesn't follow a progressive transition from mínimum to maximum ISO in dark situations , in stead it seems to maintain itself in lower values ISO and shows even in the finder seems to have reached the máximum 3200 ISO. Then it provokes an underexposed pics. Francisco Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 22, 2016 Author Share #5 Posted April 22, 2016 This behavior doesn't occur when I use Auto ISO maintaining 50 /3200 ISO Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 22, 2016 Author Share #6 Posted April 22, 2016 Even when I'm making measurements where the ISO value drops from 3200 to 1640 without changing the opening photos are underexposed. If ISO drops the exposure should be OK. Francisco Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerhard.hagen Posted April 22, 2016 Share #7 Posted April 22, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Even when I'm making measurements where the ISO value drops from 3200 to 1640 without changing the opening photos are underexposed. If ISO drops the exposure should be OK. Francisco Hi there, the same is true with me and it gets worse if you set min iso e.g. to 800. The resulting fotos are much more underexposed while the shutter speed is well above the 1/f limit (i mean faster than the limit) and underexposure could have been prevented by lowering shutter speeds. It is only misbehaving in mode "A" not in modes "M" or "T". Sincerely Gerhard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted April 22, 2016 Share #8 Posted April 22, 2016 Whilst I am not completely clear on the problem above, I did notice inconsistent behaviour when testing exposure compensation and elevated min-ISO values. The camera does not like reducing the shutter speed to meet my requested exposure adjustment when an elevated min-ISO is set on auto-ISO. There may be a minor bug associated with the min-ISO setting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 22, 2016 Author Share #9 Posted April 22, 2016 Thank you Gerhard and Budfox. UUUFFFF! I thought like if I were crasy. Francisco Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted April 24, 2016 Share #10 Posted April 24, 2016 I have reported this problem with the min ISO setting over and over again. It is not fixed yet in fw 2.0. I tested and thought it had been, but then I found that the camera was reverting to ISO 50-50000 because I used my user profile to configure the setup between lenses. Ugh, my mistake. To reiterate: Whenever I set the bottom limit for Auto ISO to anything but 50, the exposure is off and the full ISO range is not achieved. This happens repeatably. It is particularly bad in lighting situations close to EV 5 @ ISO 100 (and less) in overall illumination, which is truly unfortunate since that's when I'd most like Auto ISO to work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 24, 2016 Author Share #11 Posted April 24, 2016 I have reported this problem with the min ISO setting over and over again. It is not fixed yet in fw 2.0. I tested and thought it had been, but then I found that the camera was reverting to ISO 50-50000 because I used my user profile to configure the setup between lenses. Ugh, my mistake. To reiterate: Whenever I set the bottom limit for Auto ISO to anything but 50, the exposure is off and the full ISO range is not achieved. This happens repeatably. It is particularly bad in lighting situations close to EV 5 @ ISO 100 (and less) in overall illumination, which is truly unfortunate since that's when I'd most like Auto ISO to work. Thank you, for helping. . We must be grateful with Leica for the publication of V2.0 firmware. They have solved a lot of uncomfortable bugs and introduced also a lot of performances we enjoy but, always but, some of new performances like “mínimum ISO” don’t work and i ask myself, if we have being expecting firmware V.2.0 for more than one year, now we are condemned to bear those mistakes along nobody knows how long they will be disappear. This brings to address me to the Leica board expressing our complain for the iterative Leica behavior delaying the publication of firmware, asking them to accelerate the solve of bugs as soon as they have found the key of each one instead of waiting for a spectacular bag of solutions which, I recognize, has more marketing impact. For me and I hope for many of us it’s more agreeable to use a camera without such or such technical advantage than to take care every time we hold the camera about such or such bug. It’s something like obsessive not knowing when this horrible beast will ruin our next photo.. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted April 24, 2016 Share #12 Posted April 24, 2016 At least with the lower limit being broken, we haven't lost anything. The upper limit works without any problems, just leave the lower limit at 50. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 24, 2016 Author Share #13 Posted April 24, 2016 OK. I did it since I realize the problem Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted April 24, 2016 Share #14 Posted April 24, 2016 Thank you, for helping. . We must be grateful with Leica for the publication of V2.0 firmware. They have solved a lot of uncomfortable bugs and introduced also a lot of performances we enjoy but, always but, some of new performances like “mínimum ISO” don’t work and i ask myself, if we have being expecting firmware V.2.0 for more than one year, now we are condemned to bear those mistakes along nobody knows how long they will be disappear. This brings to address me to the Leica board expressing our complain for the iterative Leica behavior delaying the publication of firmware, asking them to accelerate the solve of bugs as soon as they have found the key of each one instead of waiting for a spectacular bag of solutions which, I recognize, has more marketing impact. For me and I hope for many of us it’s more agreeable to use a camera without such or such technical advantage than to take care every time we hold the camera about such or such bug. It’s something like obsessive not knowing when this horrible beast will ruin our next photo.. Francisco. Two comments: (1) the camera hasnt been out a year, and this major firmware update has been released very quickly. (2) the EVF is so good, i tend to judge exposure with exposure preview, rather than rely on when the meter is reading. I probably need to switcg from spot to matrix metering, but I find judging exposure from the EVF by far the best neans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted April 25, 2016 Share #15 Posted April 25, 2016 IkarusJohn: In my testing, I found that Spot reading meter pattern resulted in this problem being minimized. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 25, 2016 Author Share #16 Posted April 25, 2016 John and Ramarren, may be will be better I explain my positon. Your first 1) point it's ok and I'm wrong, my mind betrayed me thinking in my past experiences with my M (240) still not clean of bugs. Concerning your second 2) point, and also I'm referring to what Ramarren says, it seems to me that the problem I found out hasn't nothing to do with what both of you say. Neither if the bug permits use the camera normally nor if the EVF is Super: the problem persists and must be corrected for the ones who want use the minimum ISO, for instance me, needing to maintain the speed of my camera in high limits to help my shaking hands. I consider that everybody must think that people doesnt speak in arbitrary way and has their own reasons to say what they say. Thank you. Francisco Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted April 25, 2016 Share #17 Posted April 25, 2016 ... for the ones who want use the minimum ISO, for instance me, needing to maintain the speed of my camera in high limits to help my shaking hands. ... I agree that the current behavior is broken and needs to be fixed. When that will happen I have no idea. In my testing, I found that A and P modes (and pattern or CW averaging meter operation) were the ones that had the most inconsistent results with Auto ISO. Since I use R lenses most of the time and A mode most of the time, it's particularly annoying/inconvenient to me. Two workarounds exist now: With dedicated lenses, using Auto ISO with T mode does not suffer from this problem. With all lenses, the bottom and top Auto ISO limits work well with Manual exposure mode. That way you can set the shutter time and lens opening you want and the camera will slide the ISO around in the range you set, netting consistently good exposures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted April 25, 2016 Share #18 Posted April 25, 2016 My apologies, Francisco. I was not intending to be critical of you. Of course, if you're experiencing this problem it should be fixed. There are other small issues which I'm sure Leica will fix. My intent was to share with you the way I operate my camera, which avoids this problem. If you use the camera in M mode with AutoISO, minimum ISO of 50, then the camera works properly? For myself, I turn on exposure preview (a brief press on the Fn button with my settings) and I can see the exposure. Conversely, if it is your point there is a bug, then the answer is yes. You can be sure it is not the only remaining bug. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 25, 2016 Author Share #19 Posted April 25, 2016 Please don't worry John and Ramarren excuse me because I'm spanish and don't have the habit and the knowledge to express me in english.. May be I'm a ittle rude. Tomorrow I will tell you how I use a personal profile to control my ApoTelyt R 180 mm f/3,4 in M mode. Today it's a little late. Bye. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted April 26, 2016 Share #20 Posted April 26, 2016 Francisco, your english is is far better than my Spanish! Nothing seemed offensive in your comments as far as I'm concerned... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.