Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Ko ...
you have the ME since 2016 and haven't figured out to maximize it's potential within the limitations this very basic digital camera has?
You are pulling our collective legs here, right?
If not then : RTFMIn case you lost your's or the camera didn't come with one, you can download it here:
https://www.camerauserguide.net/lei...anual-instruction-manual-user-guide-pdf/14927
p. 118 histogram
p. 126/127 white balance
p. 135-137 exposure
Cheers
Thank you! I'm just not good at Wetzlarian English.
As an Leica manual expert, could you tell me - where M-E was metering on this shot. It is M-E SOOC picture:
Honestly, to me Leica manuals are just as dumb as their sales texts. Empty, pathetic, sometimes just total BS.
Normal cameras manuals have pictures where areas of exposure measurement are shown. My Canon DSLR manuals do.
olifaunt
Well-known
From the movie: "I have lots of pictures that I think are just as good, but my public doesn't agree with me"
Now isn't that a truth! We don't "see" our own pictures like others do.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Thank you! I'm just not good at Wetzlarian English.
As an Leica manual expert, could you tell me - where M-E was metering on this shot. It is M-E SOOC picture:
Honestly, to me Leica manuals are just as dumb as their sales texts. Empty, pathetic, sometimes just total BS.
Normal cameras manuals have pictures where areas of exposure measurement are shown. My Canon DSLR manuals do.
Ko you are about 1 stop maybe a touch more under exposed. You needed to open up a stop. Tere is sky and snow that could have tricked the meter. Are you consistently getting under exposed files?
I did a really fast edit on this. But it is under exposed.
peterm1
Mentor
Thank you! I'm just not good at Wetzlarian English.
As an Leica manual expert, could you tell me - where M-E was metering on this shot. It is M-E SOOC picture:
Honestly, to me Leica manuals are just as dumb as their sales texts. Empty, pathetic, sometimes just total BS.
Normal cameras manuals have pictures where areas of exposure measurement are shown. My Canon DSLR manuals do.
I am not a Leica expert but am a long time user of Leica and an even longer time photographer.
The under exposure in the shot indicates to me that the camera's light meter seems to be heavily influenced by the bright sky. Even so the sky looks a little dull to me - more dull than I would expect if the above is so. (which of course is what you are complaining about). But that thought gives rise to one further thing to check - do you have any negative exposure compensation dialed in? I had not thought to ask this before but should ask it now. If so this would also tend to under expose the image. (I usually shoot my M8 up to one stop under using the exposure compensation as it is easier to recover shadow detail when post processing images than to recover blown highlights and my shots will often come out of camera looking quite dark like your images. This does not bother me as I know it can be corrected in Lightroom very quickly and effectively.) If it continues to happen with your camera and it bothers you because you have an aversion to post processing, there may be a simple solution - go the other way with exposure compensation and dial in half a stop or more positive correction. Then shoot away. Your meter will still get confused now and then but it may be better for your purpose. And you may also do as I suggested before and use an 18% grey to meter from and having done that shoot in manual mode using ambient lighting conditions rather than meter every shot. You can still dial in positive exposure compensation before you do that of course if that helps.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
I agree Peter. Ko, I would say next time find something in the area your subject is in that is about 18% gray and set your exposure from that info.
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
Do digital Leicas hold the exposure with half-press on the release?
My first impression of that photo was that maybe the release was inadvertently half-pressed in the last moments while the camera was being raised - thereby taking a meter reading towards the sky - and then when the camera shutter was released at eye level, the sky-reading was retained.
My first impression of that photo was that maybe the release was inadvertently half-pressed in the last moments while the camera was being raised - thereby taking a meter reading towards the sky - and then when the camera shutter was released at eye level, the sky-reading was retained.
peterm1
Mentor
Sounds entirely plausible to me. Yes leicas do lock exposure on a half press of the shutter button. I am not sure how the M-E rates but the half press on my M8 is abysmal - it is very sensitive and it is far too easy to either press a smidgin too hard and take the shot before you are ready or do as you have suggested and accidentally move the finger enough to unlock the half press activated exposure lock. I have read that there have been later improvements in this regard but I am not sure when these were implemented. I had not considered this eventually but perhaps should have. Still if this problem is not isolated to a single image or even a few images it may not be the issue in this case.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Half-press is the only explanation I understand...
I followed what was written here about metering.
S16 works fine.
Handheld or in the Phone meter would be even better.
Still have to find out how to get colours closer to something I like.
Colour temperature isn't working as I want. So far custom WB was the best.
Metering by the camera is more trouble then light is difficult. It just acted like Bessa R for this shot and another one. Just blinking arrows, never got it to solid circle.
Printing of it shows more interesting result.
I followed what was written here about metering.
S16 works fine.
Handheld or in the Phone meter would be even better.
Still have to find out how to get colours closer to something I like.
Colour temperature isn't working as I want. So far custom WB was the best.
Metering by the camera is more trouble then light is difficult. It just acted like Bessa R for this shot and another one. Just blinking arrows, never got it to solid circle.
Printing of it shows more interesting result.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Neither of these two photos that you just posted pose the contrast problem for the meter of the original one that you posted. These are a much different lighting situation than the first one had. Now if you see in the bottom photo the blown highlights in the light area to the far left top of the frame? If that area was a large enough area in the frame like in the original one and the meter was reading that area this bottom image it would have been under if you the photographer didn't compensate for that. Its like someone in a window that is backlit and the bright window fills the frame. If you just rely on the meter then you will under expose the subject.
Richard G
Mentor
The metered field in absolute terms with a 28mm lens is much larger than with a 50. In the Leica M5 manual, for instance, the metering field of the 135mm lens is given by the rangefinder patch alone, of the 50mm lens by curved lines in the VF/RF window near the RF patch and the metering field for the 35 is given by the 135mm frame lines etc. The later Leicas have a wider metering field. I can't find anything clear in the M9-P manual but the M6 manual has it that the metering field diameter is 2/3 of the short side of the relevant focal length frame line in the viewfinder. This, with a 28, is quite a way bigger than the 90 mm frame lines. The snow in the OP's first picture will have certainly contributed to the metering as airfrogusmc has pointed out.
Vince Lupo
Barely Known
That's a really nice shot - has a bit of Bill Brandt/Bruce Davidson in terms of tonality. Good moment.
35photo
Well-known
:bang: :bang::bang:Ko ...
you have the ME since 2016 and haven't figured out to maximize it's potential within the limitations this very basic digital camera has?
You are pulling our collective legs here, right?
If not then : RTFM
https://www.camerauserguide.net/lei...anual-instruction-manual-user-guide-pdf/14927
p. 118 histogram
p. 126/127 white balance
p. 135-137 exposure
Cheers
I mean I don't know what to say... but the fact there are tons of rookie's on this forum that have a hard time admitting so... some not... and this yet another classic example... Time to hit the books hard and practice a hell of a lot more... Sorry I don't like to sugar coat things....In fact there was a a lot of really good info on this thread... Much to learn if you got the time and desire...
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Thank you, I'm reading D. Moriyama "How I take photographs" and this one was taken on the side alley.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Ko yeah I agree with Vince. The alley shot is a real gem.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
And you are horse blinder, from selective readers camp
Once again, Leica manual doesn't even shows the area of the exposure measurement. Just one vague phrase.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Thank you, it was "always look around" case.
Seems to be a couple, one was in this alley, another at the street, was asking for directions. But I have no idea what was the place they were asking about. Maybe it is not even in Toronto, if not imaginary. Here is shortage of mental services in Canada, if not deliberate ignorance.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Ko I think the M-E has a center weighted meter in it. But use any meter as just a starting point or an anchor. It is only a tool and not something to totally rely on. That's why a photographer is and always needs to be in the mix. It is that photographer that takes the info and if there is a lot of backlight his experience will tell him if he needs to not trust that info and compensate for the back light in some way. Like I said earlier I would meter the sky and then eh are in the shadow and have figure out what i am going to lose and how my exposure is going to effect that decision. That would all be done before I started shooting. Then I would do a test shot to make sure I was keeping the areas that were important to the final photograph.
The reason I asked earlier if you are experiencing the same under exposure with the M-E all the time, maybe the meter needs to be adjusted. Of it is consistent and you know it is the meter then you could just open up the amount you have found it is under-exposing. Maybe get a gray card or a Kodak color chart and do some tests in bright sunlight and shade.
The reason I asked earlier if you are experiencing the same under exposure with the M-E all the time, maybe the meter needs to be adjusted. Of it is consistent and you know it is the meter then you could just open up the amount you have found it is under-exposing. Maybe get a gray card or a Kodak color chart and do some tests in bright sunlight and shade.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
No, it is not every time. I used AE at the end of the day yesterday, then it was dark and it came out just nicely.
It is most likely me half-pressing and holding. Then I walk camera, lens are slightly upwards. I half-press to wake it up.
Or it is how this 28mm lens is measured with bright part of the scene, as Peter mentioned.
In manual is it saying something like "extremely center weighted". Just one phrase, no drawing.
If I remember correct I used M-E as spot meter, with AE and lock for this one and it came out fine:
Exactly same lens...
It is most likely me half-pressing and holding. Then I walk camera, lens are slightly upwards. I half-press to wake it up.
Or it is how this 28mm lens is measured with bright part of the scene, as Peter mentioned.
In manual is it saying something like "extremely center weighted". Just one phrase, no drawing.
If I remember correct I used M-E as spot meter, with AE and lock for this one and it came out fine:
Exactly same lens...
airfrogusmc
Mentor
The subjects in the foreground do look a bit under on my monitor. I have the M-E and I don't think it has a spot meter mode.
If the scene has a lot of bright light in the frame the meter is seeing that all as 18% gray. If doesn't know better. Its a meter. The photographer is the one that should know. If the sky has important details then I would meter that making sure that the sky was the only thing influencing the meter and I would then open up two stop from that reading. That would move the sky to Zone VII which should hold detail. Do a fast test shot and see if all the info is indeed there. Adjust accordingly. In post I would then do a quick mask (CS6) over the sky to hold the detail and pull up the shadows.
If the scene has a lot of bright light in the frame the meter is seeing that all as 18% gray. If doesn't know better. Its a meter. The photographer is the one that should know. If the sky has important details then I would meter that making sure that the sky was the only thing influencing the meter and I would then open up two stop from that reading. That would move the sky to Zone VII which should hold detail. Do a fast test shot and see if all the info is indeed there. Adjust accordingly. In post I would then do a quick mask (CS6) over the sky to hold the detail and pull up the shadows.
Henry
Well-known
It's just center-weighted. They used to have a little graphic showing the expected coverage based on focal length, but it must not be in current versions of the manual because I couldn't find it in my M240 documents.