Exposure Compensation Question

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, pgk said:

I often guesstimate exposure (that said I never shift from base ISO relying on post processing rather than in camera amplification☺️) and it is surprising how good such guesstimates can be..........

The way I have learned things, there is no substitute to "getting it right in the camera".  I hate it when my exposure was wrong, even though editing software can be a pretty good bandaid.  I'm not sure what you meant by "camera amplification", but to me, post processing should only be for things that couldn't have been captured in the original image.  

Today I tried shooting with the exposure comp set to -0.7 as suggested earlier in this thread, and judging ONLY by viewing the image on my camera screen, the -0.7 corrected what 'looked like' a slightly overexposed image.  I won't know for sure until I download the images into my laptop.  I use "Photo Mechanic" to do that, before  they ever get to Lightroom or DarkTable, and I'm pleased when they look good in Photo Mechanic, no processing.  I'll find out tonight if the -0.7 exposure compensation helped or not.

[Advertisement]

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

[MikeMyers]

4 hours ago, Kwesi said:

Hi Mike,

Form the look of your photos, I think you are getting the hang of this exposure thing quite well. That being said, I agree with pgk(Paul), its almost too easy to shoot in manual with an M. 

In broad daylight set your ISO to 200 for the least amount of noise, turn your lens and aperture till only the red dot appears in the viewfinder, dot plus right triangle equals .5 stop over. Right triangle alone means you are at least one stop over. the opposite applies for the left triangle.

LEAVE YOUR METER AT HOME 😀!!  Since the M 240, the values are no longer the same so your exposure will be of if you rely on a handheld. Try it and at least you will no how many stops you are off.

Not sure how I feel about leaving the meter at home, but in reality, that's what I've been doing.  I haven't yet taken it with me even once.  For me, it's one thing at a time.  Thanks for the compliment - none of my images have been greatly under or over exposed, so Lightroom can make fine adjustments easily, but following my version of the advice in this forum, things seem to be going well.

Thank you for the information as to how much under and over exposure result  from those things in my viewfinder.  I didn't know that.

Other than for when I've been trying to use "unusual" settings, I've been setting my shutter to 1/1000th outdoors, and the aperture to something in the middle, maybe f/5.6 or f/8.  I haven't even checked yet what ISO speeds the camera is selecting.  I understand what you mean, at ISO 100 I'll have the lowest amount of noise, but so far digital noise has rarely been a problem for me.  I need to post more photos in this forum, so you guys can judge from my results, rather than from what I write here.  

If I didn't already say it, you have all been a HUGE help.  I know it will get easier as time goes on, but so far, for me, it's been a real challenge to get an image from my m10 that I'm completely happy with.

[Jeff S]

8 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

I disagree with your last sentence " Its really not difficult to use a Leica Rangefinder manually - that's how they were designed to work originally and they do so very well......".   Maybe long ago I was used to these things, and could select a good set of Aperture and Shutter, but 40 or 50 years of Nikonization have allowed me to lose that information.  You would be completely correct, once I re-learn how to make the appropriate settings, but as of today, it would be nothing more than a guess -- UNLESS I HAD A METER.  With a good meter, I agree with you completely, and maybe that's where my future is going to go.   I dunno.....

 

 

I’m confused... you may have had 40-50 years of Nikon use, but you had the M8.2 relatively recently. What did you do then?  Using an M is like riding a bike; muscle memory kicks in fast, even for an old guy like me. The principles and techniques are practically the same across M models. Did you never get comfortable with your ‘bike’ in the first place?

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

I’m confused... you may have had 40-50 years of Nikon use, but you had the M8.2 relatively recently. What did you do then?  Using an M is like riding a bike; muscle memory kicks in fast, even for an old guy like me. The principles and techniques are practically the same across M models. Did you never get comfortable with your ‘bike’ in the first place?

Jeff

Don't start 🙄

[MikeMyers]

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I’m confused... you may have had 40-50 years of Nikon use, but you had the M8.2 relatively recently. What did you do then?  Using an M is like riding a bike; muscle memory kicks in fast, even for an old guy like me. The principles and techniques are practically the same across M models. Did you never get comfortable with your ‘bike’ in the first place?

Jeff

I got the M8.2 about ten years ago, and no, I never got "comfortable" with it.  I did get it to do what I wanted, but it was always a struggle.  I was using both the Leica and the Nikon, and my Fuji, and I didn't have all the good information yet that I've gotten from you guys.  

I started with a Contax II, then got Nikon SP, then got Leica M2, and they all worked essentially the same way.  Then I got a Nikon F, and all the automation came along.  I decided ten years ago I wanted to go back to my roots, so I got the M8.2, and while I did get it to do what I wanted, I must have forgotten a lot of good stuff about photography. 

I disagree, "using an M is like riding a bike; muscle memory kicks in fast..."   Not for me.  There was no muscle memory, it was all long since forgotten.  I used to be comfortable with my rangefinder cameras, but all of that is history.  I'm learning again from the beginning.  

Don't get me wrong, I'm in NO WAY complaining, and the M10 is much more forgiving than the M8.2, and one way or another I do get it to do whatever I want.  You guys are helping me understand it, but photography is photography - the basic concepts remain.  It's just that now I need to do more things than before, and if I mess up (such as focusing), the image is scrap.  As to your last comment, I am right now far more comfortable with my "bike" than ten years ago.  I worked with the M8.2 for several months, then went back to Nikonland.  

I know, the camera is just a tool, nothing more than a wrench to a mechanic.  It's *me* that needs to capture a good photo, and the M10 is just a fancier tool, but the M10 "fits" me better than the M8.2 did.  I capture my better photos using the M, but the M is just helping me do what I already want to do.  Here's one photo from today.  I was down on the ground with these birds, but I decided to use a 90mm lens, not 50, as I didn't want to be too close....

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!

Edited March 6, 2020 by MikeMyers

[Jeff S]

The bike analogy was based on the idea that, at some point, one becomes comfortable riding it; hence the muscle memory comment.  Seems that didn’t happen for you earlier.  No big deal; some never bond with the RF experience, and move on. But persistence and practice will likely pay off for you, hopefully to the point that it becomes second nature. As you say, it’s just a tool.  Time will tell if it’s a good one for you. Enjoy.

Jeff

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Actually, I have no idea if I ever "bonded" with the rangefinder experience.  It was all I knew, and while "bonding" doesn't fit my experience, it was like my enlarger, or any of my other tools - I knew how to use them, they did their job, and allowed me to do what I needed to do.  Eventually I forgot about each of them, and just "used" them.  Focusing the rangefinder was like changing the channel on a TV.  I never thought twice about it, any more than I thought about winding or rewinding film.  It just.....    was.   I could load and unload my cameras in the dark, or blindfolded, and I bought my bulk film to reload my own cassettes.  If I messed up, I found out plenty soon in my darkroom, and changed things as needed.  

I'm not trying to "bond" with my camera.  I just need to learn how to use it, preferably without thinking too much about it.  The "thinking" should go into making a photograph.  Setting and adjusting the camera will just take patience, until I can do it naturally.

.....and my other cameras are just sitting in their storage places.  The only camera I'm using currently is the M10.  In another few weeks, I hope it will all be as natural to me as shooting with my D750.  

.....and while I'm using Lightroom currently, I'm also using DarkTable, which mostly does the same things, and for that matter, while I have Photoshop, I'm trying to get equally good with all the DxO software.  .........and a little persistent searching will find Google's old "Nik Collection" available for free.  I had been using that a lot until recently, but lately I'm using the M10 images with very little adjustment.

 

Back on target for this thread, you guys suggested going with an exposure compensation of -0.7, which I did today.  Here's a typical result.  I have not adjusted the exposure in Lightroom, this is what the -0.7 got me.  I can see what you guys mean, that it's unlikely my highlights are going to be burnt out, as the whole image is a little darker than what I was getting before.  I wish this was the default setting for the M10, but I guess for a while I just leave it at -0.7 exp. comp.

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!

[Jeff S]

Some people bond with exposure comp experience; some just go manual.

Jeff

[MikeMyers]

Wish list for the future.  Since while using auto-ISO, the camera is "aware" of the overall exposure (reasonable, under, over) and since the camera is selecting the one thing that the photographer doesn't yet know (ISO speed), it would be useful to display the ISO in the optical viewfinder along with the arrows, the dot, and the other information there now.

(If the photographer was surprised, one way or another, about the selected ISO, he could change one of the two settings HE is selecting, aperture and shutter.)

Maybe in the M11.....

[pgk]

16 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

The way I have learned things, there is no substitute to "getting it right in the camera".  I hate it when my exposure was wrong, even though editing software can be a pretty good bandaid.  I'm not sure what you meant by "camera amplification", but to me, post processing should only be for things that couldn't have been captured in the original image.

It all depem

ads on what you think 'getting it right in the camera' actually means, defining a 'correct' exposure and understanding what ISO does (hint: it doesn't change the sensitivity of the sensor). Post processing is an essential part of digital photography, fail to understand this and you are in JPEG land.

[MikeMyers]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

It all depem

ads on what you think 'getting it right in the camera' actually means, defining a 'correct' exposure and understanding what ISO does (hint: it doesn't change the sensitivity of the sensor). Post processing is an essential part of digital photography, fail to understand this and you are in JPEG land.

Thank you for turning my view of the world inside out.  Time to read up on what ISO *really* does.  Until right now, I thought it was equivalent to ASA in film, that it adjusts the sensitivity to light. If possible, can you please post a link to a detailed explanation of what you meant?

[MikeMyers]

Hmm, I will wait for your response.  Here's a technical post that explains ISO:

https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/6615/what-is-iso-on-a-digital-camera

It matches what I have always thought, but it also talks about a sensor becoming saturated with too much light.  I think that is what is happening with "blown highlights".

Please explain how all of this is not correct?  For me, ISO is the digital equivalent of ASA, and similar things happen.  At a very high number, films look grainy, and digital sensors look "noisy".  To me, an ISO value is what allows me to use my desired aperture and shutter values.  (Which is why using auto-ISO doesn't bother me too much, for general photography.  

(But thanks to you, I am curious what changes electronically if you switch between ISO 200 and ISO 2000, or maybe ISO 20000.  The sensor didn't change, so what happens in the electronics to allow this to work as it does?  Maybe that's what you meant?)

[Jeff S]

https://clarkvision.com/articles/iso/

Jeff

[a.noctilux]

Or here

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!

[...

The ISO standard itself only links the lightness of the final file to initial exposure, which can be used via amplification or not.

This means as a general rule, increasing ISO only reduces the time of exposure, thus producing more noise from each color and less light hits the sensor.

...]

[pgk]

54 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

Thank you for turning my view of the world inside out.

You are welcome😁. FWIW I never change my camera settings from base ISO and rely on careful post processing to get the results I want. Exposure is sorted via the histogram - not perfect but good enough. I print at 'native resolution' and 200dpi minimum which gives me 'fine art prints' which I have sold through a gallery. Others may have very different views on digital photography but my workflow works for myself and as you may tell from the above, for others too. I have stated before though that photography is visual and if what you see satisfies you then that's what matter. 'Accurate', 'correct'' 'best' and all these technical requirements are valid only when there is a reason for them to be (I have a photo science/sci phot background where they can be essential) but when it comes down to general photography they are less so.

[MikeMyers]

I will read the second link posted up above in a few minutes, but I'd like to ask something now.

Based on this new view of the world, let's say I set the aperture based on the depth of field I prefer for that image.  Then let's say I also set the shutter speed to an appropriate speed for what I'm photographing, and how much motion blur I may want in the image.  

As you, and the article pointed out, the "brightness" can be achieved in Post Processing.  At this point, I think I have accomplished everything to capture a good image, but for one thing....

What do I select for ISO?    .....it may not matter, but it has to be selected.  There is no option for N/A (Not Applicable).

Oh, and just to confirm, does the M10 have a 16-bit A/D converter ?

 

All of this sounds alien to the way I have always thought, but assuming the concept works in practice, I'd like to give it a try.

[Dennis]

@MikeMyers 

IMHO, I really think that working in Manual can make a big difference. Because when you fully embrace what aperture, shutter speed, and iSO are correctly doing for separate and together, you will realize that manual is more accessible, it's a problem solving. It can let you enjoy more the experience to shoot.

Funny facts: The last time I used exposure compensation, I was 18 years old and working on a ferry (small boat) as photographer. I had a Nikon F5, a zoom lens (don't remember which), and a Metz TTL flash. I was shooting the passenger around the boat, and I was shooting in P mode (completely automatic) but with exposure compensation. The ship was all white around, and depending on the color of the skin of people (black VS white, for example) and the background, I was compensating +/- 2 g... At that time, it was speedy. I was very fast. The only thing I was doing is changing the exposure compensation, that's it.

If I were in the same situation again and now, I would choose MANUAL 100 times. It's easier, faster, smarter ... IMHO
Also, the idea of its name is freaking me out: compensation. WTF! My dear camera, you don't need to compensate for anything, how dare you? 🤣 I'm in charge, not my camera. The camera doesn't decide for you, you choose for her. Does it make sense?
 
I always shoot in M, changing the three settings. And sometimes, when it's just a snapshot, I have a user profile called "Maybe," where I set my Leica M10 in A (for both shutter speed and ISO), I put F/4, and I click ... The ISO is set to a maximum of 6400 and maximum shutter speed on 1/500 ... This is my Auto Mode for 5% of the time.
But for almost everything, M is the key. I guess it's about practice and practice, bright ideas on your mind, and purpose. Step by step.
 
Ending this, I'm with you, Mike. I own Leica since last year and, although I have no problem with the exposure, I'm struggling with the focus. I'm still learning how to be faster ... Step by step
Patience, and a lot of passion 🙂But in my humble opinion, a Leica M is not a camera for use exposure compensation 

[MikeMyers]

Dennis, an hour or so ago, I would have given a different reply.  Fortunately or unfortunately, my view of the world is completely changed, and it will be for you as well.

So, you put your camera in Manual mode, you set your shutter speed and aperture to what you think are appropriate values.  Done.

>>>>>BUT<<<<<  based on the above links, what will you set your ISO to?  .....and why???   (In my case, anything I would have done before is wrong, as I was selecting an aperture that would have given me a nice image on a film camera, but now I understand that may NOT be the best choice??

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[evikne]

15 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

I will read the second link posted up above in a few minutes, but I'd like to ask something now.

Based on this new view of the world, let's say I set the aperture based on the depth of field I prefer for that image.  Then let's say I also set the shutter speed to an appropriate speed for what I'm photographing, and how much motion blur I may want in the image.  

As you, and the article pointed out, the "brightness" can be achieved in Post Processing.  At this point, I think I have accomplished everything to capture a good image, but for one thing....

What do I select for ISO?    .....it may not matter, but it has to be selected.  There is no option for N/A (Not Applicable).

Oh, and just to confirm, does the M10 have a 16-bit A/D converter ?

 

All of this sounds alien to the way I have always thought, but assuming the concept works in practice, I'd like to give it a try.

There are several threads around ISO invariance in this forum. Like this one:

Lately, I've started to almost exclusively shoot at ISO 200 all the time (the nearest we come M10's base ISO). I shoot fully manual and of course I adjust aperture and exposure time as normal, but when it starts to get darker and I normally would raise the ISO, I just leave it at 200. When I raise the exposure later in LR, there is hardly any difference between such a photo and a photo with a higher ISO. Doing it in camera with ISO or in post processing, is essentially the same thing. Maybe not fully, but good enough for me, and the benefits of simplicity outweigh the disadvantages. 

So if you think adjusting ISO is cumbersome, maybe this is something to consider, even though it's still a controversial method. 

Edited March 6, 2020 by evikne

[MikeMyers]

12 minutes ago, evikne said:

Lately, I've started to almost exclusively shoot at ISO 200 all the time (the nearest we come M10's base ISO). I shoot fully manual and of course I adjust aperture and exposure time as normal, but when it starts to get darker and I normally would raise the ISO, I just leave it at 200. When I raise the exposure later in LR, there is hardly any difference between such a photo and a photo with a higher ISO....

I was just reading the other link up above from a.noctilux, and half way through it I came to the same conclusion as what you just wrote.  Select Manual mode, select ISO 200, select an aperture based on depth of field, and select a shutter speed based on motion within the image (more or less desired).  Then adjust the image in whatever image editor I'm using, perhaps Lightroom or DarkTable.

Will try this today, and see how well it works, or what issues I need to deal with.

(......and if I'm shooting in a dark room, I may select something other than 200, as I would have before my world got all discombobulated.)