jamietea20

Since I couldnt find a sub forum for Sigma camera users, I'll just try my luck here, but.....Where do I begin: So discovered this new wonder of Foveo, while getting lost in Youtube, and since the price of filmstocks are going higher each year, I decided to give it a try. Girl friend bought a brand new SD quattro while on holiday in Japan. But when I finally get my hands on it, it has anything but headaches for me... Here is the chronology 1) I only have M42 lenses, and throw them on to tryout, but the photos came out with this heavy and unusable green cast. 2) then I took the lens off, and it appears that the sensor gives off green blank image regardless 3) immediate freaking out and the inevitably that I just dropped on a $700 potato cam. so Internet search I did 4) some suggests to update the filmware with type A or B image processing file(PLEASE Need your Help! Bought new Sigma SD quattro and images are green!: Sigma Camera Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review) 5) Then I realized the firmware is already the lastest version 1.13, and the system won't let me update again even though I put all the right files in the SD card, 6) Then I came across this thread who states he had the same problem (SD Quattro H Firmware update problem, help please.: Sigma Camera Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review), but no one was able to solve the problem 7) writing this post, and tryin not to think any more about it, and let it ruin my day.... Any wise guys out there??? I'm attaching a sample picture with my m42 lens, and another taken at the same position without a lens(bare sensor) , the third one taking against a white wall, so you can see the green color chunks. PS: please don't tell me to go and buy an expensive Sigma lens. Because I've tried multiple lenses and obviously this is not just the problem cause by my lens. with m42 lens bare sensor uneven color chunks

I found my answers, thank you everyone..

Umm.... no, with the incident meter, the bunny under the metered reading will be over exposed, as you said the camera will not handle the brightness, hence you need to "compensate" to under expose from what the meter reading is... with a spot meter you see exactly how bright it is, so I don't understand what you need to "compensate" afterwards...?

I can see this is true for mostly outdoor settings with only wide shot of an assortment of subjects in the frame, where there's a single light source(sun), and the reflective factors are negligible. Otherwise, even for an outdoor portrait, you still need to calculate, either mentally or with a spot meter for the skin tone differences.

I don't see how this has anything to do what I am asking... in your stated scenario, I will meter whatever subject I intend to "bring out", let it be the dog, bunny or leaves. What I am saying is that why would I meter for the bunny using an incident and then adjust the compensation due to its skin tone, instead of using a spot and exposure as what the meter tells me.... And if I want to do an averaging of the three, I can step back and let the viewfinder include all three, or spot meter each and find a common ground. Still, if I use an incident, not only I'm doing all that, I also have to mentally add/subtract the reflective factor

I don't believe this is true, you need to meter many times with incident meter as much as spot meter. Just because it measures the amount of light falling on to the subject doesn't mean it's constant, say over a surface..

I never use flash, and even if I do, I don't understand why can't I keep the flash turned on continuously and use a spot meter...

This is not really helpful. Can you elaborate more and how it can answer my original questions? I already know how each meter work..

There is a correction for a typo in my original post" I don't understand: If a spot meter can you give the reading of the amount of light reflected from the subject, which is essentially is what the camera sensor/film will be exposed to, then why bother using a *Incident meter* and then having to adjust the skin tone/reflective surface factor? "

I don't understand what this "more tricky" mean? At the end of the day we are metering what we want to see on the image, don't we. Then, "People come in all sorts of colors, their skin reflectance varies a lot with perspiration and makeup" is preceisely my point, if we can spot meter it accruately to what the camera sees, why get an average reading and not factor in the skin colors????

I know how each meter works, but I don't understand why ----what my first post asks...

I don't understand: If a spot meter can you give the reading of the amount of light reflected from the subject, which is essentially is what the camera sensor/film will be exposed to, then why bother using a *Incident meter* and then having to adjust the skin tone/reflective surface factor? Could anyone explain? (Moderator Note - the content has been edited to reflect post #8)

I guess I agree to the fact that there IS a difference but what I'm trying to say is that they are so minute that in most of the circumstances, (especially when today everything ends up to be viewed on a computer), it is almost pointless to spend the extra bucks. If, at the end of the day, your work ends up on instagram.....

Let me ask you this, have you seen the movie Dark Knight? It was shot on 35mm and 65mm, were you able to tell which one is which when you were looking at a 40 FEET screen in the movie theatre?