shawn
Mentor
https://www.overgaard.dk/leica-M9-d...e-17-light-metering-and quality-of-light.html
This one covers the options in the M240 a bit..
https://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-M-Ty...1-lightmetering-white-balance-simplicity.html
Shawn
This one covers the options in the M240 a bit..
https://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-M-Ty...1-lightmetering-white-balance-simplicity.html
Shawn
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Yeah thats what I thought, An with the M 10 you can have spot but only in live view IIRC
Ko what you are experiencing are all the reasons I only shoot manually. Once I get the info from the meter I know the light doesn't usually change all the much. I did say usually. But once I have the knowledge of the shadows and highlights and have done a quick test I just use that info. I don't chase the meter because I know that it will change the exposure when it shouldn't.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Yes, I'm getting to same conclusion. S16 or meter. Maybe it is good thing. I usually snap by walking by. Lots of crappy framing. Now I will try to stop, measure and take it. I'll act like Winogrand 
. Should add external 28mm VF for complete re-entrancement.
. Should add external 28mm VF for complete re-entrancement.
icebear
Mentor
Ko, there is a "virtual" circle around the focus field in the viewfinder that somewhat represents the area covered by the center weighted metering in Leica cameras that use reflected light from the shutter curtain. In the analog cameras you have a white dot in front of the curtain. With the digital metal shutters you have one segment in a brighter color to reflect the light to a photo cell on the bottom inside the body. The wider the angle of view of your lens, the more of the scene gets covered by the metering area. Basically the result is getting more unspecific the shorter the focal length you choose. You are e.g. getting more influence of the bright sky.
The nice thing about a digital camera is that you can immediately check the exposure result. The perfect tool for this evaluation of the exposure is the histogram. Learn to use it to understand if the metering was OK, i.e. resulting in a proper exposure or if the image is strongly underexposed like in your example taken with a 28mm lens. If the camera's basic metering doesn't yield a proper exposure in a difficult lighting situation, then YOU have to make a decison how to compensate to get a better exposure. You can choose to meter in a different manner, e.g. pointing down to the ground, half press and then frame with this metering result. Or you meter pointing at the scene in the same way, half press and open the aperture half or one stop.
There are cameras with multi metering scene modes that take care of this for you. A Leica M9/ M-E is not one those. That's the beauty of these primitve and basic RF cameras, you are in charge. Not some programmer who developed a fancy algorythm that gets it right in 90+% of average scenes.
If the shot is great you are resposible, if the shot sucks, then well ... you are responsible as well.
I like it this way and I go nuts if any instrument I use has seemingly a mind of it's own and is trying to override my intentions. If I make a seplling mistake it's my own.
One general remark on the "18% grey"
This is a grey that is reflecting only 18% of the light, that is actually pretty dark grey.
As for WB, yes the auto WB in the M9/M-E sucks, use manual WB (I use the expo disc) and enjoy the wonderful colors of the Leica lenses in combination with the CCD sensor ... and calibrate your monitor.
Cheers
The nice thing about a digital camera is that you can immediately check the exposure result. The perfect tool for this evaluation of the exposure is the histogram. Learn to use it to understand if the metering was OK, i.e. resulting in a proper exposure or if the image is strongly underexposed like in your example taken with a 28mm lens. If the camera's basic metering doesn't yield a proper exposure in a difficult lighting situation, then YOU have to make a decison how to compensate to get a better exposure. You can choose to meter in a different manner, e.g. pointing down to the ground, half press and then frame with this metering result. Or you meter pointing at the scene in the same way, half press and open the aperture half or one stop.
There are cameras with multi metering scene modes that take care of this for you. A Leica M9/ M-E is not one those. That's the beauty of these primitve and basic RF cameras, you are in charge. Not some programmer who developed a fancy algorythm that gets it right in 90+% of average scenes.
If the shot is great you are resposible, if the shot sucks, then well ... you are responsible as well.
I like it this way and I go nuts if any instrument I use has seemingly a mind of it's own and is trying to override my intentions. If I make a seplling mistake it's my own.
One general remark on the "18% grey"
This is a grey that is reflecting only 18% of the light, that is actually pretty dark grey.
As for WB, yes the auto WB in the M9/M-E sucks, use manual WB (I use the expo disc) and enjoy the wonderful colors of the Leica lenses in combination with the CCD sensor ... and calibrate your monitor.
Cheers
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Klaus I would argue 18% gray is in the middle of the zones. So middle gray. See Zone V below.
From Fred Pickers book Zone VI Workshop page 10 IIRC this was taken from Ansel Adams The Negative.
Zone I Effective threshold. First step above complete black in a print. Slight tonality, but no texture.
Zone II First suggestion of texture. Deep tonalities, representing the darkest part of the image in which some detail is required.
Zone III
Average dark materials. Low values showing adequate testure.
Zone IV
Average dark foliage. Dark stone. Landscape shadow. Recommended shadow value for portraits in sunlight.
Zone V
Clear north sky (panchromatic rendering). Dark skin. Gray stone. Average weathered wood. Middle Gray (18% reflectance).
Zone VI
Average Caucasian skin value is sunlight or artificial light, and in diffused sunlight or very soft light. Light stone. Clear north sky (orthochromatic rendering). Shadows on snow in sunlight snowscapes.
Zone VII
Very light skin. Light-gray objects. Average snow with acute side lighting.
Zone VIII
Whites with textures and delicate values (not blank whites). Snow in full shade. Highlights on Caucasian skin.
Zone IX
Glaring white surfaces. Snow in flat sunlight. White without texture. (The only subjects higher than Zone IV would be light sources, either actual or reflected; but the would obviously be rendered in print as maximum white values of the paper surface.)
From Fred Pickers book Zone VI Workshop page 10 IIRC this was taken from Ansel Adams The Negative.
Zone I Effective threshold. First step above complete black in a print. Slight tonality, but no texture.
Zone II First suggestion of texture. Deep tonalities, representing the darkest part of the image in which some detail is required.
Zone III
Average dark materials. Low values showing adequate testure.
Zone IV
Average dark foliage. Dark stone. Landscape shadow. Recommended shadow value for portraits in sunlight.
Zone V
Clear north sky (panchromatic rendering). Dark skin. Gray stone. Average weathered wood. Middle Gray (18% reflectance).
Zone VI
Average Caucasian skin value is sunlight or artificial light, and in diffused sunlight or very soft light. Light stone. Clear north sky (orthochromatic rendering). Shadows on snow in sunlight snowscapes.
Zone VII
Very light skin. Light-gray objects. Average snow with acute side lighting.
Zone VIII
Whites with textures and delicate values (not blank whites). Snow in full shade. Highlights on Caucasian skin.
Zone IX
Glaring white surfaces. Snow in flat sunlight. White without texture. (The only subjects higher than Zone IV would be light sources, either actual or reflected; but the would obviously be rendered in print as maximum white values of the paper surface.)