Csacwp Posted July 14, 2017 Share #1 Posted July 14, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm having some trouble shooting manual exposure on my M246. I've decided to become proficient in reading light without a light meter using the Sunny 16 rule. So far I've been really frustrated as it seems I am constantly misjudging how much light there actually is. For example, today it is partially cloudy and there are soft shadows. I was shooting at base iso (320). Assuming that on a bright, cloudless day I would need to shoot at f16 and 320th of a second, I judged using the rule that on this partially cloudy day with soft, faint shadows that I would need to shoot at f8 at 320th of a second. This turned out to be multiple stops unexposed, and I needed to shoot at f4 at 125th of a second to get a balanced exposure. This makes no sense to me... in every description of the sunny 16 rule that I've read, f4 at 1 divided by the ISO should be adequate for sunsets and low-light in the shade. I needed an even faster shutter speed to capture what looked to my eyes to partially cloudy day. This is just one example... over the last week I've gone out shooting multiple times for hours at a time and have had the same results... my photos are underexposed by multiple stops, even when it is actually sunny and nearly cloudless outside (f11 at 1 divided by the ISO according to the sunny 16 rule, but more like f5.6 in my actual experience). Does anybody have any clue as to what I could be doing wrong? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 14, 2017 Posted July 14, 2017 Hi Csacwp, Take a look here Problems with manual exposure. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
a.noctilux Posted July 14, 2017 Share #2 Posted July 14, 2017 With or without filter ? Why don't you just use the built-in lightmeter and histogram to help your "F16 rule" ? By the way Monochrom have plenty of DR to recover under-exposed pictures. Colored filters may be used just as b&w film : I would use yellow filter for overcast day photos. But that's just me (would follow the M meter also) or in case, bracketting is my friend, if possible. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csacwp Posted July 14, 2017 Author Share #3 Posted July 14, 2017 Using the in camera meter defeats the purpose of learning to quickly selecting one's own exposure. I was not using any filters for these tests, and using them of course would underexpose things further. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csacwp Posted July 14, 2017 Author Share #4 Posted July 14, 2017 I'm learning to manually expose so that I can also use my film M without stopping to meter. Underexposing is not an option with b&w film... if anything it's best to overexpose. On my monochrome I normally underexpose by a stop, but for the sake of practicing manually selecting exposures without metering, I am currently trying to get a balanced exposure. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted July 14, 2017 Share #5 Posted July 14, 2017 I understand now what you want to realize. You may use this expomat as guide : http://expomat.tripod.com/ May I suggest that you use it for a while, then the freedom will come . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted July 14, 2017 Share #6 Posted July 14, 2017 I'm learning to manually expose so that I can also use my film M without stopping to meter. Underexposing is not an option with b&w film... if anything it's best to overexpose. On my monochrome I normally underexpose by a stop, but for the sake of practicing manually selecting exposures without metering, I am currently trying to get a balanced exposure. Hi, I feel your frustration. In the world of digital ISO ratings manufacturers are given leeway to set their own numbers. so Leica's ISO 320 does not have the same sensitivity to light as a roll of film with ISO 320. Thats why your sunny f16 rule is not giving you the results you expect. For example, with my M240 on a sunny day here in New England, my exposure is 1/750 at between 5.6 and 8.0 at ISO 200. According to the Sunny F16 rule my exposure should be approximately 1/750 @ f16. My suggestion is remember your correct settings so you can make educated guesses before you turn on your camera. Unfortunately you can't use the light meter reading in your M246 as a guide for setting exposure in your film camera unless you add in the inherent exposure bias in the M246 reading. The good news is that at least the bias will be consistent Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted July 14, 2017 Share #7 Posted July 14, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Kwesi explained the root matter. The basic ISO of your camera is likely 200. Work from there. Indeed, it is only about a stop difference, but you are not using a film camera. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted July 14, 2017 Share #8 Posted July 14, 2017 Kwesi, that's very odd that your Sunny F16 rule is 1/750 @ F16 for ISO 200. Mine would be 1/200 not 1/750 for ISO200 F16 sunny day. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
105012 Posted July 14, 2017 Share #9 Posted July 14, 2017 I think Kwesi meant 1/250th (nearest dial setting). In addition to what has been said above, note that the biological eye is remarkable at adapting to low light conditions and this can affect your estimation at the start. If you find this occurring you will quickly start figuring out ways to compensate for this out performance. An incident meter is a real help for double checking your low light estimations as you calibrate your eyes. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csacwp Posted July 14, 2017 Author Share #10 Posted July 14, 2017 So you are saying that the ISO 320 on the M246 is actually the same light sensitivity as ISO 200 film or ISO 200 on the M240? That would give me something to work with. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted July 14, 2017 Share #11 Posted July 14, 2017 Csacwp, I am entirely sympathetic with your struggle which reminds me of my similar conundrums long before digital was a dream. For a moment aside, if I may, regardless of your F16 experiences with a digital camera when you do transit to film you will find a profound difference and you will find what really works. Digital is delusion. If/when you go to film I hope you will develop your own film (not strictly necessary) and view your negatives to see the real analog thing, for better or worse. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted July 15, 2017 Share #12 Posted July 15, 2017 Kwesi, that's very odd that your Sunny F16 rule is 1/750 @ F16 for ISO 200. Mine would be 1/200 not 1/750 for ISO200 F16 sunny day. Oops! Thanks for the correction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted July 15, 2017 Share #13 Posted July 15, 2017 So you are saying that the ISO 320 on the M246 is actually the same light sensitivity as ISO 200 film or ISO 200 on the M240? That would give me something to work with. I have been experimenting with light yellow filters and relying on the histogram on my M246 so I haven't quite gotten a feel for what the base ISO is for the Sunny f16. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted July 15, 2017 Share #14 Posted July 15, 2017 So you are saying that the ISO 320 on the M246 is actually the same light sensitivity as ISO 200 film or ISO 200 on the M240? That would give me something to work with. Well, that may work. The route you are tracing to analog/film by using Monochrom as "exposure guide" may be fun, but you may forget that film IS way different from sensor. Sensors don't have the forgiven "compressed curves at each end" of film. When you apply the same parameters from sensor to film, you may use only the linear portion of film: sensor response IS linear. The shape of a characteristic curve yields a significant amount of information about a particular film and the conditions used to process or develop the film. Several features of a typical characteristic curve (for black & white and color negative films) are illustrated in Figure 3. The curve is generally divided into three distinct regions, a toe region to the left, a linear region in the center, and a shoulder region on the right. Shapes and slopes of characteristic curves vary, depending upon exposure and processing conditions and the film emulsion characteristics. Curve and text extract from: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/photomicrography/filmexposure.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted July 15, 2017 Share #15 Posted July 15, 2017 Learning to read light without benefit of a meter is a powerful skill to have. Once acquired, you'll at the same time become attuned to other qualities, such as the directionality and quality of light and the dynamic range of your film or sensor. Exposure with a digital camera isn't meaningfully different than with film. True, you'll quickly have problems if you overexpose... but, then, transparency shooters have had that exact same quandary for decades. I've got Adox Scala slide film currently sitting in my M7 and I meter that exactly as I do my M246. It seems that most (digital) photographers today set their cameras to underexpose by a stop or two (and camera manufacturers sometimes even aid in that by building in inherent underexposure metering bias) and call it a day. Well, there's correct exposure for what you're trying to achieve. And there's everything else. You can use the sunny-16 rule as your reference for learning exposure. But given its interpretive nature, it's inevitably fraught with a large dollop of slop. If you really want to learn exposure - and, by extension, the properties of light itself - buy yourself a decent incident light meter. Use it for awhile and in no time you'll be able to glance at a scene and know instantly what you're looking at. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted July 15, 2017 Share #16 Posted July 15, 2017 Where are you? Sunny 16 is based on 16 being the brightest clear day at around noon. Where I live in London it's usually more like Sunny 8/11 due to atmospheric conditions etc. It's a case of experimenting at first to see what works for you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csacwp Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share #17 Posted July 15, 2017 Jager, I've been using a digital Sekonic handheld meter as a guide as I learn this. When I use it's readings on my M246 I get underexposed photos, but it is accurate for film. I shoot digital and film equally, so maybe it is a mistake to try and learn to read light without a meter, since I can't memorize a single system that works for both mediums. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Albertson Posted July 15, 2017 Share #18 Posted July 15, 2017 Jager, I've been using a digital Sekonic handheld meter as a guide as I learn this. When I use it's readings on my M246 I get underexposed photos, but it is accurate for film. I shoot digital and film equally, so maybe it is a mistake to try and learn to read light without a meter, since I can't memorize a single system that works for both mediums. I wouldn't bother trying to work out exposure for the Monochrom without a meter. Negative film has a lot of headroom, so you can always overexpose a bit and get away with it. With the MM (like with slide film) overexposure will lead to blown highlights that can't be recovered. The "underexposed" shots you're getting by using a Sekonic meter are fine - the highlight exposure is spot on, and you can recover tons of shadow detail in post-processing (something that you can't do too much with slide film). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csacwp Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share #19 Posted July 15, 2017 We had the first sunny day here in a while and I had much better luck today on the M246 using the sunny 16 rule. My exposures were all of a sudden spot on. I'll have to develop some film to see if the M4 shots came out well. Maybe the problem all along was that I was grossly overestimating how much ambient light was present. 1 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.