jhluxton Posted October 8, 2016 Share #1 Posted October 8, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) On Wednesday I finally bought an M type 262 with 35mm f2 Summicron after promising myself an M for years. I then eagerly anticipated a trip on Friday and Saturday to a heritage railway event which I attend each year. On Thursday evening I loaded a memory card took two indoor pictures using available artificial light, was very pleased with the result and thought come Friday i can really put my new camera through its paces. I had thought about just taking the new M but given that it was untried I thought I would take along my trusty X1 as well. Anyway I am glad I did otherwise I wouldn't have had that many photos! I took a few photos in auto mode on the M262 and was shocked as to how dark and murky they were. Yes it was a cloudy day with very flat lighting - but these images were clearly underexposed - well under exposed these almost had a brownish tint. I also tried a few shots in B/W mode as well. Then I switched to manual using the on board metering as a guide at first and was still finding images dark. I switched cameras and went back to using the X1 otherwise I was missing photo opportunities. Later I did a test exposure of a stone wall with no sky visible and the exposure appeared okay. However after that I switched back to the X1 and decided to re-read the instruction book when I returned home. This morning before leaving home I took a bracketed shot out of my bedroom window and one of the three appeared okay. On returning to the railway today I tried again and had some success either by using the auto bracketing or basing manual exposures on my knowledge of a 100/200 ASA slide film characteristics I had learnt when using my first 35mm cameras - a non metered Praktica Nova 1b in the 1970s. Later I had also owned a Leica IIIf which I used mainly with Ilford FP4 again using an exposure guide. Thus I am not averse to making my own settings - but should I be having to work so hard? Frankly as it stands I do not trust this camera. At present I rank my M262 as bad the Pentax auto 110 and a more recently owned 35mm Canon Sureshot water proof camera - in terms of poor exposure. But these were both cheap / cheerful cameras fully automatic cameras without manual controls. I never thought that an M which I had hankered over for so long would come in as such a disappointment. On Thursday I was thinking about what accessories and lenses I might like to acquire in the future - but frankly that is all on hold. I am no photographic novice who hasn't got a clue about how to use inbuilt meters and work with difficult light All my previous Leica digital cameras owned since 2000 have proved to brilliant machines with perhaps the exception of the D3 which I always found clumsy to handle due to its bulky lens, but none of these have caused me exposure problems except with odd shot and many have been used in manual mode. I hope someone can suggest that I am doing something wrong or do I have a "lemon" camera which needs returning - however, if these are the characteristics of this camera I guess I may have made a very costly mistake. John Edited October 8, 2016 by jhluxton Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 8, 2016 Posted October 8, 2016 Hi jhluxton, Take a look here New M262 disappointing - exposure problems. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pico Posted October 8, 2016 Share #2 Posted October 8, 2016 (edited) Your unfortunate experience saddens me. It should not happen. If I may, a question: can you tell us what exposures were made for the awfully underexposed frames? Can you post or point us to a DNG? If you cannot post a DNG, then email me and I will be happy to put it on my FTP site so the rest of us can look at it. Let us follow up on this. Best, Pico EDIT: docmoore is full of it. Edited October 8, 2016 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 8, 2016 Share #3 Posted October 8, 2016 (edited) On Wednesday I finally bought an M type 262 with 35mm f2 Summicron after promising myself an M for years. I then eagerly anticipated a trip on Friday and Saturday to a heritage railway event which I attend each year. On Thursday evening I loaded a memory card took two indoor pictures using available artificial light, was very pleased with the result and thought come Friday i can really put my new camera through its paces. I had thought about just taking the new M but given that it was untried I thought I would take along my trusty X1 as well. Anyway I am glad I did otherwise I wouldn't have had that many photos! I too a few photos in auto mode and was shocked as to how dark and murky they were. Yes it was a murky day - but these were clearly underexposed - well under exposed these almost had a brownish tint. I also tried a few shots in B/W mode as well. Then I switched to manual using the on board metering as a guide at first and was still finding images dark. Later I did a test exposure of a stone wall with no sky visible and the exposure appeared okay. I hope someone can suggest that I am doing something wrong or do I have a "lemon" camera which needs returning - however, if these are the characteristics of this camera I guess I may have made a very costly mistake. John Pico will sort it for you Edited October 8, 2016 by docmoore Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted October 8, 2016 Share #4 Posted October 8, 2016 (edited) I don't have the M262, but I do have the M240. You'll be using what Leica calls Classic metering, i.e. centre weighted metering off the shutter blades. A typical scene with a good proportion of sky will underexpose the non- sky scene, because metering is dominated by the sky. If you shoot in raw, then you can correct this in post - you can do the same with jpg, but it's harder. Your X1 is likely to be using multifield metering and will produce a more balanced image. To give some credit to Leica, exposing for the highlights can be helpful, because it is easier to recover shadows than blown sky highlights. The solution to this is to know when to use exposure compensation, and how much for different scenes. On the M240 for a typical outdoor scene with plenty of irrelevant sky, I may compensate up to +1. But you may end up with blown sky highlights if you go too far. Edited October 8, 2016 by LocalHero1953 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 8, 2016 Share #5 Posted October 8, 2016 You might wish to show us one of your dark pics and tell us on what part of it you did AE lock if any. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted October 8, 2016 Share #6 Posted October 8, 2016 I too went from an X2 to and M and have extensive photography knowledge. The meter in the X2 is set up more like a point and shoot. The M is a different kind of camera and takes a little getting use to. Your Praktica and Leica IIIf required a little thinking to get the exposure right. One you used them for a while shooting was a breeze.........wasn't it? The X is an out of the box is a point and shoot with incredible IQ......minimal thinking required (for focus and exposure). You really do have to do a little relearning with the M.Be sure the meter is working correctly. And that the exposure compensation is at 0. Get used to focusing, re-aiming for exposure then re-frame for composition. You do need to think about exposure with the M even on Auto.....then create a shooting system that works for you. Soon it will be second nature. It really is not a lot of work, once you get used to it. Also you really should shoot DNG with the M. On the X the Jpgs are really great on the M not so good...but the DNG's are amazing. And a little Lightroom goes a long way to bring the exposure back in balance. It should also be said, digital is very different than film.......again a little Lightroom and Photoshop goes a long way (worth repeating). If all of this is too much work then the the M is not for you.......But stick with it, its worth it. If you loved photography with your Praktica and Leica IIIf, the M is the same thing .....your in complete control. And the M is such a joy to use. Hope this helps 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share #7 Posted October 8, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Your unfortunate experience saddens me. It should not happen. If I may, a question: can you tell us what exposures were made for the awfully underexposed frames? Can you post or point us to a DNG? If you cannot post a DNG, then email me and I will be happy to put it on my FTP site so the rest of us can look at it. Let us follow up on this. Best, Pico EDIT: docmoore is full of it. Thanks Most of the photos I took were in JPG which I prefer due to smaller file size, however, I did switch to DNG for a few today. I will post a selection on Sunday. John Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share #8 Posted October 8, 2016 (edited) I don't have the M262, but I do have the M240. You'll be using what Leica calls Classic metering, i.e. centre weighted metering off the shutter blades. A typical scene with a good proportion of sky will underexpose the non- sky scene, because metering is dominated by the sky. If you shoot in raw, then you can correct this in post - you can do the same with jpg, but it's harder. Your X1 is likely to be using multifield metering and will produce a more balanced image. To give some credit to Leica, exposing for the highlights can be helpful, because it is easier to recover shadows than blown sky highlights. The solution to this is to know when to use exposure compensation, and how much for different scenes. On the M240 for a typical outdoor scene with plenty of irrelevant sky, I may compensate up to +1. But you may end up with blown sky highlights if you go too far. Most of the 35mm film cameras I used in the 80s & 90s - Contax 139 / 137 / RTS II and G1 all had centre weighted metering. Virtually all the film I put through these cameras was Agfa CT transparency stock which doesn't have much latitude for error and I can't recall having many problems - certainly nothing like I have experienced on Friday and Saturday. I didn't opt for the 240 as frankly paying for the video function appeared pointless - I hardly ever do video clips. Two clips in the past 12 months taken on the X-V told me it was an unnecessary expense. Yes I know as a consequence I lost Live View but didn't think it necessary, something I am probably now regretting. When I had a Digilux 3 I only ever used the optical SLR viewfinder - never needed to check the exposure after shooting so thought I could live without liveview. As for correcting the images I have always used Photoshop Elements to tweak JPGs if necessary - to be honest I have not tried it on the images out of the M262 but there appears to be too many that need attention. John Edited October 9, 2016 by jhluxton Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share #9 Posted October 8, 2016 You might wish to show us one of your dark pics and tell us on what part of it you did AE lock if any. Yes I did AE lock - tried metering of the ground and over exposed! John Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 8, 2016 Share #10 Posted October 8, 2016 Yes I did AE lock - tried metering of the ground and over exposed! Hardly surprising if you metered on the ground, unless the later was bright IMO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share #11 Posted October 8, 2016 I too went from an X2 to and M and have extensive photography knowledge. The meter in the X2 is set up more like a point and shoot. The M is a different kind of camera and takes a little getting use to. Your Praktica and Leica IIIf required a little thinking to get the exposure right. One you used them for a while shooting was a breeze.........wasn't it? The X is an out of the box is a point and shoot with incredible IQ......minimal thinking required (for focus and exposure). You really do have to do a little relearning with the M. Be sure the meter is working correctly. And that the exposure compensation is at 0. Get used to focusing, re-aiming for exposure then re-frame for composition. You do need to think about exposure with the M even on Auto.....then create a shooting system that works for you. Soon it will be second nature. It really is not a lot of work, once you get used to it. Also you really should shoot DNG with the M. On the X the Jpgs are really great on the M not so good...but the DNG's are amazing. And a little Lightroom goes a long way to bring the exposure back in balance. It should also be said, digital is very different than film.......again a little Lightroom and Photoshop goes a long way (worth repeating). If all of this is too much work then the the M is not for you.......But stick with it, its worth it. If you loved photography with your Praktica and Leica IIIf, the M is the same thing .....your in complete control. And the M is such a joy to use. Hope this helps The Praktica and IIIF were easy to use - but basically I was using the exposure info for non metered cameras which used to be on the film leaflet. This is still something i remember and actually took a number of manual exposures based on what I recall from this adjusted to cope with the camera's 200 ASA minimum. Trouble with DNG is that it takes up so much space on the memory card and hard disk - I have many thousands of digital images taken since 2000 - and like to keep an out of camera original copy - these are already backed up on several external hard drives basically three lots of back ups. If I switch to DNG I will need many more external drives for backing up. Yes External HDs are very cheap now but given my tendency to want to keep three copies - just in case - means I am going to end up with lots of hard drives! At present I can still keep my entire 2000 to 2016 JPG collection at present on one 1 TB hard drive which enables me to keep a copy on me at all times. John 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted October 9, 2016 Share #12 Posted October 9, 2016 Trouble with DNG is that it takes up so much space on the memory card and hard disk I am starting to think this is a prank … You aren’t serious, are you? 9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 9, 2016 Author Share #13 Posted October 9, 2016 (edited) I am starting to think this is a prank … You aren’t serious, are you? Prank - certainly not. DNGs take over twice the space of a JPG and I have always preferred shooting JPGs. Edited October 9, 2016 by jhluxton Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 9, 2016 Author Share #14 Posted October 9, 2016 (edited) I have posted some un retourched jpg photos to: http://www.jhluxton.com/Other/Leica-M-262/n-sBZM7D/ Unfortunately my file hosting - SmugMug wont accept the DNGs - unknown file format. The captions describe the exposure settings. John Edited October 9, 2016 by jhluxton 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted October 9, 2016 Share #15 Posted October 9, 2016 (edited) The Praktica and IIIF were easy to use - but basically I was using the exposure info for non metered cameras which used to be on the film leaflet. This is still something i remember and actually took a number of manual exposures based on what I recall from this adjusted to cope with the camera's 200 ASA minimum. Trouble with DNG is that it takes up so much space on the memory card and hard disk - I have many thousands of digital images taken since 2000 - and like to keep an out of camera original copy - these are already backed up on several external hard drives basically three lots of back ups. If I switch to DNG I will need many more external drives for backing up. Yes External HDs are very cheap now but given my tendency to want to keep three copies - just in case - means I am going to end up with lots of hard drives! At present I can still keep my entire 2000 to 2016 JPG collection at present on one 1 TB hard drive which enables me to keep a copy on me at all times. John Why did you want an M, with its manual focus and high resolution sensor ? In this digital world, each time we get a new camera the files get bigger and bigger. And we get Hard Drives......and back up Hard Drives. Do you need big files? Do you need a full frame sensor? How do you use your photos? I mean this respectfully.......but it sounds like the M is not for you. Edited October 9, 2016 by ECohen Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 9, 2016 Author Share #16 Posted October 9, 2016 (edited) I mean this respectfully.......Sounds like the M's not for you Based on my previous experience with cameras and range of cameras used I had no reason to believe when deciding to buy an M that it wasn't for me. Seemed to be right up my street. Though if it is a case of user error strange I have been getting by since I first used that manual Praktica as a teenager in the 1970s. As for what I wanted an M: Always admired the Leica design, heritage - always wanted one even before digital came along that is why I had a second hand IIIF. Looking back through my long list of cameras virtually all my film cameras were manual focus - even had one a Rollei 35 which was guess the focus! So AF / Manual not important. I sold the IIIF to raise funds towards the purchase of a Contax G1. At the time (1996) I could get a complete Contax G1 kit for the price of the then current film M and standard lens and for financial reasons at the time Contax appeared the way to go. John Edited October 9, 2016 by jhluxton 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted October 9, 2016 Share #17 Posted October 9, 2016 Raw files are the equivalent of negatives, from which you make your final jpg/print. At the moment you are using your M262 to give you a set of prints from Snappy Snaps, and telling them to ditch the negatives. There ARE people on this forum who only shoot jpg, but I can only think of one, and I suspect it is after he has explored his camera and can make it produce exactly the jpgs he likes. For a camera with the IQ and potential of the M262, I would suggest you revert to manual shooting in raw, and get to know exactly how it behaves in different scenarios, and how to bring the best out of the files in pp. Only then can you start doing auto shooting of jpgs to get the results you want. Of course, once you have achieved the perfect image, you can save it as a jpg and delete the dng! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scaryink Posted October 9, 2016 Share #18 Posted October 9, 2016 Prank - certainly not. DNGs take over twice the space of a JPG and I have always preferred shooting JPGs. Using a Leica M and not wanting dng's? The whole point of the camera is to shoot raw and develop your images. LOL. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted October 9, 2016 Share #19 Posted October 9, 2016 (edited) Based on my previous experience with cameras and range of cameras used I had no reason to believe when deciding to buy an M that it wasn't for me. Seemed to be right up my street. Though if it is a case of user error strange I have been getting by since I first used that manual Praktica as a teenager in the 1970s. John Do some tests.....shoot a grey card....etc., post some results. This is a great Forum with nice people happy to help......perhaps it is the camera. I would agree with LocalHero1953 regarding shooting DNG's, they are your negatives. There is a compressed DNG setting. How big is your SD card? Do you download and erase after each outing? Seriously if the files from your camera are too big....... its the wrong camera for you. You'll sort it out its a great camera ,worth all the trouble. Edited October 9, 2016 by ECohen 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 9, 2016 Author Share #20 Posted October 9, 2016 Do some tests.....shoot a grey card....etc., post some results. This is a great Forum with nice people happy to help......perhaps it is the camera. I would agree with LocalHero1953 regarding shooting DNG's, they are your negatives. There is a compressed DNG setting. How big is your SD card? Do you download and erase after each outing? Seriously if the files from your camera are too big....... its the wrong camera for you. You'll sort it out its a great camera ,worth all the trouble. SD card in the camera is 32MB when I switched from JPG Fine to DNG+JPG capacity dropped significantly. However, I am now beginning to wonder if this is the 'kick in the pants' I need to switch to DNG and cast my reluctance and excuses aside. I have just opened one of the few DNG files I took today in Photoshop Elements 14. Having played around with some of the adjustments possible with one of the poorly exposed images I have managed to correct it quite easily. I will download Lightroom from the Leica site in the morning, take some DNG photos and report back. John 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.