Excessive underexposure with strong light sources

[chuhsi1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My biggest shock in moving from a Nikon SLR to my M10-R is the auto exposure system. I always used matrix metering on my Nikon and never had a problem. The M10-R's center-weighted metering sets the wrong exposure much more frequently in uneven lighting. I work around it by pre-metering to a different part of the scene, using exposure compensation more, and using manual exposure.

[Advertisement]

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

[jdlaing]

11 minutes ago, chuhsi1 said:

 I work around it by pre-metering to a different part of the scene, using exposure compensation more, and using manual exposure.

(Don’t tell anyone you’ve discovered the secret!) 😃

[Guest]

9 hours ago, chuhsi1 said:

I always used matrix metering on my Nikon and never had a problem.

You can still use an equivalent mode, multi-field metering via live view. 

[charlesphoto99]

3 hours ago, OThomas said:

You can still use an equivalent mode, multi-field metering via live view. 

Only one problem with that scenario: live view! (imo live view/EVF defeats the entire M's reason of being).  

[pop]

25 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Only one problem with that scenario: live view! (imo live view/EVF defeats the entire M's reason of being).  

You don't have to look throught the EVF or at the screen. Just look through the viewfinder and pretend LV doesn't happen.

Edited September 15, 2022 by pop
typo

[M11 for me]

vor 23 Minuten schrieb charlesphoto99:

Only one problem with that scenario: live view! (imo live view/EVF defeats the entire M's reason of being).  

This is just a view. I could not be without Visoflex2. And Leica knows why they offer such an item.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

48 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Only one problem with that scenario: live view! (imo live view/EVF defeats the entire M's reason of being).  

True, but using longer lenses, 90mm+, it’s irreplaceable for me. Not as young as I used to be and eyesight isn’t as good. 
 

[yanidel]

1 hour ago, pop said:

You don't have to look throught the EVF or at the screen. Just look through the viewfinder and pretend LV doesn't happen.

yes, could be workaround in these situations, at the expense of battery life. 

[charlesphoto99]

2 hours ago, M11 for me said:

This is just a view. I could not be without Visoflex2. And Leica knows why they offer such an item.

Unfortunately my only experience is with the M10 and 020 which I find to be a really subpar experience vs the rf, esp if shooting anything moving. I tried the V2 in the store on an M11 - better in terms of blackout time but still like watching a bad mini TV for me. Of course, doing macro with an M it's a must. The raison behind the frame lines in the OVF is so one can avoid tunnel vision and see what's OUTSIDE the frame, and move it into if need be, which can make for a more fluid vision and shooting style than an slr/evf. 

[rmitchell146]

I have a similar problem with my M10R, if I take two identical shots especially in low light, one optical vg the other live view (both centre weighted exp) , the live view is 1.5 stops brighter. Any ideas?

[Huss]

5 hours ago, rmitchell146 said:

I have a similar problem with my M10R, if I take two identical shots especially in low light, one optical vg the other live view (both centre weighted exp) , the live view is 1.5 stops brighter. Any ideas?

I see the same thing w my 10-r.

It heavily underexposes and shots that I could take w/o much thought w my old m240 and m9 have become a struggle.

I have been experimenting w it taking test shots to see the exposure outcomes, but frankly it is surprising that it really biases the exposure to save highlights, no matter how small they are.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, rmitchell146 said:

I have a similar problem with my M10R, if I take two identical shots especially in low light, one optical vg the other live view (both centre weighted exp) , the live view is 1.5 stops brighter. Any ideas?

Different light meter function?

RF is reflected from the front of the shutter. Remove the lens and you’ll see some white and grey areas which the light bounces off onto the light meter. 

Live view uses the sensor for light metering. Hence the differing meter modes (Spot, Centre weighted and Multi field)  

You’d think they would match, maybe they don’t.  

Edited September 17, 2022 by OThomas

[Adam Bonn]

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!

M9 vs M10 shutter curtain.

I’ll leave those of you knowledgeable about such things to comment on the impact of the differences

FWIW…. I’ve managed to make a bunch of photos with the M9/240/10 where there was a strong backlight and it was underexposed!!!!!! (Because I wasn’t paying attention or because I’d rather try to recover shadows than highlights)

The only foible I find between the 9 and the 10 is that with the latter set to ISO 200 and the former set to 160, they more often than not ask for the same shutter speed…

IMO it would be redundant to replace the ISO dial with an EV wheel as the M10 (and 9/240/11) has an EV wheel already

IMHO some folks can work super fast all manual, others work fast pointing the camera at what they want to meter from, others work fast using the EV overwrite the camera’s choices… all the roads lead to Rome!

 

[adan]

13 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

I’ll leave those of you knowledgeable about such things to comment on the impact of the differences

Main difference seems to be the M9 and M10 shutters travel in opposite directions (one top to bottom, the other bottom to top) - probably as a result of Leica's moving internal parts around to squeeze down the thickness of the M10 body (while also adding a larger battery). I expect Leica simply flipped the shutter module, to move the drive/control unit on the side from left to right (or vice versa).

https://www.ebay.com/itm/265466864661

That alone would not change the metering much  - it is still a lens on the meter cell in the bottom of the chamber "looking up at" the middle of three gray bars in the middle of the image area.

[otto.f]

On 9/14/2022 at 1:41 PM, yanidel said:

in Auto Iso mode.

I hardly work with Auto ISO. It’s quite unpredictable and/or I don’t understand how it reads the scene. And it mostly turns a dark scene in a scene that is fully lit, which was not the case in reality.
I strongly agree though with what’s said before that the image is very good like this, very nice balance between highlights and shadows, drama, it’s just perfect. That you pp-ed it is all in the game with a digital M, no? I see a little banding, okay. Not so strange if you shoot right into the sun with auto-everything. If you strive for details in highlights and shadows here, you would just smooth out the drama of this scene. 

BTW, the M10 and the M10-R are both involved in this discussion, but the M10-R has a much better handling of and capacity of recovering highlights than the M10, which means a lot for what you can achieve in pp and also for how you expose. Totally different from an M9 as well.

Edited September 17, 2022 by otto.f

[charlesphoto99]

18 hours ago, otto.f said:

I hardly work with Auto ISO. It’s quite unpredictable and/or I don’t understand how it reads the scene. And it mostly turns a dark scene in a scene that is fully lit, which was not the case in reality.
 

This nails it on the head why it's so important to have a passing knowledge of the zone system, and how it relates to the camera you're shooting and the scene you're trying to portray. 

[MikeMyers]

On 9/17/2022 at 3:40 AM, Huss said:

I have been experimenting w it taking test shots to see the exposure outcomes, but frankly it is surprising that it really biases the exposure to save highlights, no matter how small they are.

Isn't this what we want?  Blown highlights are gone forever, but the shadows can be recovered.

[yanidel]

Went back shooting last week and same situation happened.  The sun wasn't close to centered but still it resulted in extreme underexposure. 

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!

Yet this time I had time to lock exposure away from the sun.  

The highlights were burnt obviously but that was the trade-off to have a correctly exposed picture.  My conclusion is that it is the way the M10 works, unlike the M9. One has to be extremely cautious when a strong light source is present (sun but also car headlights) in any place of the picture, just not the center. 

Not ideal for street photography since you don't always have the time to adjust exposure setting, but I guess I'll get used to it.

Edited September 19, 2022 by yanidel

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[MikeMyers]

48 minutes ago, yanidel said:

The highlights were burnt obviously but that was the trade-off to have a correctly exposed picture.  My conclusion is that it is the way the M10 works, unlike the M9. One has to be extremely cautious when a strong light source is present (sun but also car headlights) in any place of the picture, just not the center. 

Have you tried taking an exposure such that the highlights are not burnt out, and processing the resulting ("underexposed") image in DxO PhotoLab 5?  It is very good at bringing out the shadow detail without looking ugly because of the digital noise.

I'm no expert at this, but I've accepted that if the highlights are burnt out, that's permanent - there is no fix.  On the other hand, if the shadows are greatly underexposed, something like PhotoLab can recover the underexposed areas.

My opinion - underexposed areas can be brought back to life, but when the highlights are burnt out, there is no "fix".  The M10 usually does just what I want it to do, and "plan b" would be to set the exposure manually and accept the blown-out highlights.  Do you still have an old-fashioned exposure meter that can give you the proper exposure for the image, excluding the sun?

[yanidel]

1 hour ago, MikeMyers said:

My opinion - underexposed areas can be brought back to life, but when the highlights are burnt out, there is no "fix".  The M10 usually does just what I want it to do, and "plan b" would be to set the exposure manually and accept the blown-out highlights.  Do you still have an old-fashioned exposure meter that can give you the proper exposure for the image, excluding the sun?

I do have an external lightmeter and have expertise to expose manually. But since I found out the auto-iso feature of the M10 exposes correctly in most cases (or within +- 1IL) , I decided to use it exclusively, it helps concentrate on composition and not camera settings.  Things happen very fast in street photography and fiddling with manual exposue on the M9 always led to some lost shots. This is why I love the M10 and has helped me improve my keeper rate . With the caveat that when a strong light source is any place in the frame, one must go manual.