Solution for Underexposure with Yashica Electro 35 gt when backlight is present?

<p>This happened with three consecutive, identically framed exposures recently- in all, a light source was present at the very top center of the frame. The room was otherwise fairly dim. I'd estimate that these three were about two stops underexposed. All of the other shots on that roll were done in the same area and all were okay, as none had a light directly in the frame like that, I suppose. To give further clarification of the ambient light present, the only really sharp exposures on the roll were shot at full aperture, 1.7. I was shooting BW 400CN, rated at 400.</p>

<p>I was getting quite fond of this camera, but this problem seems like it could really inhibit one's confidence, especially when shooting seriously. Upon searching, I seem to have read that changing the film speed setting is the only way to overcome this..? But, how much, and, if I lowered it to what I think will be suggested, 100, I think that the resulting shutter speed will often be inadequate..</p>

<p>Has anyone else encountered this problem that may have a simple, hopefully uniform, solution? I really don't think there is anything wrong with the camera, as it was thoroughly re-habbed by Mark Hama several months ago, and has made some nice pictures. To make sure, I just checked, and the orange and red lights come on appropriately. Also, if you have encountered these problematic situations before, does the light causing this have to necessarily be in the upper center portion of the frame, or can it be elsewhere? Thanks for any help you can provide.</p>

Reset the Iso speed to a different number, say 1/4 speed?

<p>If you have a flash you could use that to add light ("fill flash") to your subject. If done properly you could get both the background and your subject properly exposed.</p>

<p>Yes, simply compensate the exposure to 100. This is exactly why professional cameras of that era (and even today) often have a compensation switch. Your meter is very simple. It takes an average of the whole scene and calculates what the exposure would be to make the scene gray. If there is something very very bright or very very dark in the frame, it will cause the meter to miscalculate because it will think that that object represents something that should be gray. In this case, it sees the bright light coming through the window and wants to make that gray, which makes the darker room black. What you want is for that bright light to almost blow out and for the dark room to be gray. So you need to tell the camera it has slower film so it will use a longer exposure. Other similar situations include: shooting at the beach, in the snow, and pointing the camera into the sky to shoot clouds, bright white buildings on a sunny day, a girl in a white dress taking up most of the frame (like a wedding portrait). In each of these situations, the meter will want to make things that are very very bright into gray and in doing so, will make the exposure too short and make things that should be gray be very dark. </p>

<p>The opposite is also true. If you take a photo of a friend wearing a black shirt and his shirt takes up most of the frame, then the camera will attempt to overexpose to make the shirt gray. In that case you would back off to 800 ISO when using 400 ISO film. Similar situations might include shooting in front of an open door to a very dark room or the entrance to a cave or tunnel, where the subject is standing outside of the door or tunnel in normal light and you want the room or cave to go black.</p>

<p>If you wish to avoid situations like this you can either simply avoid very bright or very dark objects in the frame or invest in an incident meter which meters the amount of light coming from the light source instead of the amount of light reflecting off of the scene.</p>

<p>Thanks Charles and James, I appreciate it. Yes, as far as resetting the ISO, I think that I follow the reasoning, but wondered if someone that shoots with this camera regularly has encountered this sort of problem, and knows when to recognize and automatically compensate for it, and what amount of adjustment might yield the best result. Lacking an exposure lock, this machine seems to entail a certain amount of educated guess work, and I'm hoping someone might have specific knowledge. </p>

<p>James, I think you're absolutely right, but I'm intending to use this camera without flash; I should have pointed that out. I actually have a good Nikon system that is great with flash. </p>

<p>Patrick, Thanks for the very good answer! I posted just now before seeing it. The only thing I might mention is that this camera is strictly auto-exposure (aperture priority only), so I'm not sure an incident meter reading would help in a practical sense..?</p>

<p>It would still be great to hear from some experienced fellow Electro 35 shooters, too.</p>

<p>Jeff,</p>

<p>I have a lot Yashicas. My GSN, GT, GS and G cameras ia always underexpsoe in blacklight situations. My solutions</p>

<p>1. Adjust the ISO setting 2 full stops downward.<br>

2. Use a flash (best solution).<br>

3 Try to re-position yourself if you can.</p>

<p>Mike</p>

<p>Hey Mike,</p>

<p>Thanks! It's good to hear that this is at least a consistent thing with other Electros, too. This was unusual, but I've only put about 4 or 5 rolls through it, total. I will definitely take your advice; of course, it makes perfect sense.</p>

<p>The more I think about that problem situation, the more I think that I understand; what kind of threw me most was that the backlit area covered such a relatively small area of the frame.. but there was a lot of range between the darkest area (foreground) and that top-center positioned light.</p>

<p>When you mentioned having several Yashicas, I thought to check out your portfolio. Very nice, and I particularly liked the ones with your gt! I wondered what you like best about these cameras? I know I love mine, and if I can solve problems like those mentioned here, I'll like it even more. I like the sharp lens, the unobtrusiveness, and the low-light ability.</p>

<p>Ahhh yeah Jeff, sorry about that! On cameras that have exterior meters like this it's also possible to put an ND filter in-front of the meter temporarily for compensation... especially if you know you are going to be shooting in scenes like I mention. There are companies that give away samples of gels and these often include a few gray ones which can be used with a little bit of tape. Either method will work, but either method has the hazard of forgetting and shooting a whole roll at the wrong exposure. </p>

<p>Thanks Patrick! Interesting tips.. I could see using them in certain situations, and yes, I wouldn't want to forget! </p>

<p>Hi Jeff,<br /><br />I like the Yashicas because the lenses are excellent. The meter is very accurate, even under low lighting situations. They also feel great in my hands. One thing I also like is the fact they are inexpensive in Japan. I can go to any recycle shop or used camera store and come across one in fairly good shape. They are underappreciated camera here and around the world IMHO.<br>

<br /><br /><br />Once I determined I liked them I decided to collect them and the accessories. I have a 2Gs, 2 black Professional (both need a lot of work), 2 GTs, a GS, a GSN, a black GX, a chrome GX, a GL, a CC, and an erratically working CCN. I bought a Yashica black MG 1. The rangefinder is completely out of whack. It cost me a lot more than it now worth. Win some, lose some. I also have the Tele and Wide auxiliary lenses and view finder. I also have the auto-up lens. In addition, I have original some Yashica filters, a camera bag, numerous field cases, and a tripod.<br>

<br /><br />Yashicas are in my price range. I cannot afford Leicas, so Yashicas were it. It could have been Minoltas or Konicas. They are just as good as Yashicas, but Yashicas won the day.<br>

<br /><br />They do have their draw backs. They PAD of death is one big issue. The inability to control the camera in manual mode was a pet peeve for a while. But once I learn to adjust the ISO setting to compensate everything is fine.<br>

<br /><br />Jeff, check out this link for the Tt manual. It gives tips on backlighting. It also advises what flash to purchase.<br>

<br /><br /><a href="http://www.cameramanuals.org/yashica_pdf/yashica_electro_35gt_gold.pdf">http://www.cameramanuals.org/yashica_pdf/yashica_electro_35gt_gold.pdf</a><br>

<br />Good Luck<br>

<br /><br />Mike</p>

<p>Hi Mike, Wow, what a nice collection! This is the only Electro that I have, but for the same reasons you mention, I really like it, and use it more and more. I've even gotten very used to having just the fixed 45mm angle of view, and usually don't find it very limiting. Sure, it would be nice to go wider once in a while, but it has really been a revelation as to how versatile a normal lens can be. I guess "liberating" is not too strong a word!:) I find that it's actually nice to not think about too many choices, and simply concentrate on using this fixed lens machine. I've even had images that were made with it published (I had it with me luckily at a historical event). </p>

<p>Yes, I know about the "pad of death", too! When I got this one, it needed everything, so I found out about Mark Hama, and sent it to him (he is in Georgia, here in the U.S.). He even warrants them for six months, and I found out first hand that he keeps his word. It's working fine, and I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it holds up for several years! Thanks for the link to the manual, too. I'd actually gotten one of those, but this reminded me to read it!</p>

<p>Really good to hear first hand about the ISO adjustments- can't wait to try this! Somehow, although I kind of knew the theory behind this, I'd so far never run into the problem where it actually affected the exposure.. I guess my Nikon had me spoiled in that regard. But this really forces one to think a little, and that has to be good. Thanks very much for the great input! Jeff </p>

<p>re: ' Thanks! It's good to hear that this is at least a consistent thing with other Electros, too. This was unusual, but I've only put about 4 or 5 rolls through it, total. I will definitely take your advice; of course, it makes perfect sense. '<br>

You are not thinking this is just a Yahica problem? The range of brightness is a problem for any camera, some just meter more cleverly. Any and all cameras will do the same without heed toward the exposure requirement.<br>

The camera, as you've observed, just 'averages' out what it sees. Get an A and an F in Algebra, your average is C. So, you have to decide if you want the subject exposed properly, which without flash equalizing things means the background gets blown out. (add two more stops of exposure)<br>

Or if the background is your goal to have very visible, then the subject would be a silhouette. (no modification to exposure, sort of what you did)<br>

The film cannot see the range your eye/brain combination can. Controlling light is what photography is all about, at the least common denominator.</p>

<p>Jim & Electro owner too.</p>

<p>Jim, Thanks for the good input. I am probably a little more proficient with manual metering than I may have sounded, as I've been shooting transparencies for years with an F3, using manual exposure almost exclusively. I understand that this Yashica is more primitive, but these three are the first really blatantly wrong exposures in the first 4-5 rolls. I just looked at some others with bright backgrounds, and while they would have definitely benefitted by either using flash (ideal), or by giving more exposure to the underexposed main subject via changing the film speed, they were nowhere near as bad as these three.</p>

<p>I'm going to attempt to attach the best of the three. If successful in attaching this, is there something noteworthy about where the light is in the frame? All three were taken from the same position. I should probably add that this image was lightened about as much as possible without the noise in the dark areas really showing; it's lightened slightly more than would be normal procedure, too.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Jeff, this looks like a POD problem to me. Have you notice if the shutter is firing at the slower speeds or at the default 1/500th. Checkout the Yashicaguys web site for repair information, I`ve managed a few simple repairs following his directions, but I`ve not attempted the POD yet. They are great cameras,well worth the small investment in purchase and repair costs.</p>

<p>Alan, Thanks for responding. I'm a bit mystified by this.. This Electro 35 was serviced professionally several months ago, and I've put a total of about 4 rolls through it so far. All of the images on the four rolls seem to have been properly exposed except for these three I've mentioned, the posted one being the lightest of three consecutive, very similar compositions.</p>

<p>The only other misses were on this same roll and shot the previous day. These pictures were outdoors, people on a fairly bright day. There was a brightly lit lawn and a bright white house and some sky in the background, the subjects were sitting in the moderate shade of a patio, and I naively did not change the film speed. But still, the Electro did not do a terrible job with these, just moderately underexposing the people. And, on the night that I was shooting the guitarists, I later made several more exposures in different lighting, and they were all fine. Additionally, with no film in the camera, I've pointed the Electro around a room and listened carefully while dry firing. The shutter speeds seemed to be adjusting as they should; at least I know that I'm hearing markedly different speeds corresponding to the respective light that was metered. And, upon cocking, the camera seems to still have the regular "Yashica clunk" sound.</p>

<p>So, my best amateur guess is that <em>perhaps that light source in the example is in just the right spot to fool this meter..?</em> I suppose my next step, if this is a logical assumption, would be to try and test this on a similar lighting situation..? I did make a clumsy attempt at this a couple of days ago, but without a shutter speed readout, it was tough to tell by the sound.</p>

<p>I agree, these are great cameras other than this possible issue. Wish I could get a grip on these particular instances of underexposure, though, so that I could recognize these situations and compensate or adjust for them in the future. Any ideas?</p>

<p>Just wanted to update this in case anyone happens upon it. Three months later, but only about three more rolls shot, and the camera seems to be working perfectly. I've even made some dimly lit street shots at night, and they came out as well as one could expect. I still love this camera, and think the problem that I experienced must have been unique to that particular situation; something I inadvertently did, or some idiosyncrasy of the metering.. Don't want to dissuade anyone from buying or using one, definitely.</p>