Jump to content

Which exposure metering do you prefer for landscapes?


Recommended Posts

I have learned that with Leica one usually have sufficient information in the dark areas so I usually expose on sky to ensure information in clouds. With my Leica-files in DNG I almost never had a problem. Multi-field is -in my view- nonsense as it simply produces the average over the entire picture. On CL I use the right wheel on the top to correct exposure to ensure information in clouds. Again I always found sufficient information in dark areas when using DNG plus Lightroom.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with PDP on exposing for highlights and adjusting shadows as needed.

Far as metering patterns, for me the live histogram and shooting raw eliminates any need for more than just using the default metering.

Aperture priority, auto ISO with shutter selection set to 4x focal length in use, right wheel for exposure compensation and left wheel to set aperture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With some scenes, careful aim when metering is essential. I learned this when I first used a 21 mm lens with my M3 and M6 in film days. With digital, I am much guided by the histogram. Occasionally, such as with theatre lighting, spot metering is more accurate; but that is an exception.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

26 minutes ago, pedaes said:

If you are shooting in RAW, there will be much more detail available than indicated by the camera's histogram.

But the histogram is still a good indicator of brightness distribution. Raw just gives more scope for recovery when clipping occurs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PDP said:

multi-field is -in my view- nonsense as it simply produces the average over the entire picture.

I love nonsenses :D. 99% auto iso in manual mode, 0% histogram and 99% multifield here. Half press the shutter button where preview looks good, recompose & shoot. Fast and easy. Works fine indoor and outdoor with manual lenses for me. YMMV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - I forgot to mention that I follow the "Jaap Histogram Rule" which means my right wheel does get adjusted according the the curve I'm seeing.

Old habits from using film die hard though and I still tend to "aim down" to the darker areas of the landscape where I probably should be aiming more for the middle when it comes to aperture/exposure settings.

Edited by Le Chef
Link to post
Share on other sites

The method is fine, but do include the sky in your metering if using center-weighed (which I prefer) . Multifield is fine too.
 Aperture is preset, AE, right wheel controls ISO, left wheel controls EV comp.. Auto-ISO is a no-no for me

Or use spot  and manual exposure and scan the subject to determine the exact dynamic range and choose accordingly. I use that method in very harsh light, like tropical noonday sun. Fixed ISO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/5/2020 at 11:48 AM, Le Chef said:

I currently use center-weighted with the 11-23 and 18-56 and find that i have to pull down exposure on the sky in most shots when in Lightroom. Should I stick with center-weighted and perhaps expose more for the sky, or switch to multi-field?

MTIA!

I don't shoot too much landscape, but when I do I almost always use a tripod and bracket three to five exposures taken in rapid succession. The tripod because no matter how good a lens is, or OIS is, a tripod will always net more detail in the final results, which to me is critical for good landscape work. And bracket because while I can measure and evaluate exposures all around the scene nicely with multi-field, center-weighted, or spot modes, what actually works out the best when I'm rendering the photos is often a half stop one way or the other of anything I guessed at in measurement. With a digital camera, the cost of having a couple of frames rather than just one exposure is nil, there's no reason not to. 

With film cameras, I have to be more precise in metering and evaluating the meter readings because I only ever have a rather limited amount of film on hand and don't like to waste too much of it. There I tend to use limited area metering (aka spot on the CL) and choose carefully the area that I feel represents the scene appropriately. Et cetera.

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

I avoid spot, because with moving scenes (either people, or moving the camera around to frame the scene), it distractingly changes the EVF brightness and histogram while I'm trying to sort out other parameters. I usually use centre-weighted because the visual exposure clues are more stable. The spatial exposure tool is irrelevant really, since I use the histogram primarily, making a secondary adjustment to compensate for very bright highlights in the frame (the sun, artificial light sources, windows while shooting indoors etc) - there's no point in trying to get them to fit in the histogram. 

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The gist of my exposure technique is related to Paul's comments: Much of exposure evaluation is metering the scene and deciding what I'm willing to lose. With digital capture, it is always wise to consider the highlight values primarily, and let the shadow values fall where they may; adjust via black point and curves in rendering. Adjusting the black point for your noise tolerance with a capture then determines the amount of dynamic range you have available at a particular ISO setting with that scene. In my experience, as with slide film, prioritizing shadow values leaves too many burned out holes with no gradation at the bright end of the range. 

Whatever metering pattern lets you see the measurements clearly for a given scene and content type is all that matter. Sometime spot works best, sometimes either of the other two. 

And yes: if you do a three to seven frame fast-sequence exposure bracket, then HDR becomes a possibility. But I only very rarely use HDR techniques: I'd rather choose what things to go bright and dark, and work with the sensor's (or film's) dynamic range on a single exposure in most cases. Much HDR looks to me too artificially even in illumination. 

G

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...