Yashica electro 35 underexposed

Hi all, apologies if this sounds like a stupid question but

I'm new to film photography.

 

I recently purchased an electro that was sold as having a

full cla.

 

I used an iso 200 film but all the indoor shots came out

underexposed. I shot pretty much wide open (no higher

than 2.8) and neither the overexposed (Red light) nor the

orange (slower than 1/30th shutter speed) were on. I

assumed this would give me the correct exposure but

obviously not. The shots I took outdoors were fine and

exposed correctly.

 

Is it just down to using the wrong film speed?

 

I know iso 400 is more advisable for indoor photography

but with the camera being aperture priority I assumed it

wouldnt allow for underexposure without lighting up the

slower than 1/30th bulb?

 

As i said, the outdoor shots on the same film week

exposed perfectly so I'm confident the meter is working.

 

Hope you can advise

 

Ryan

<p>Welcome to Photo.net.<br>

Even with an automatic camera, you need to have <em>control</em> of the information about how film speed, aperture, and shutter speed work together. A good read of Ansel Adams' various books about this would be useful. There are lots of others, too. A visit to the library would find introductory film photography books from the day when.</p>

<p>If you don't have enough light, being aperture-priority will push the shutter speed longer and longer until it reaches the limits of the system. I don't remember off hand what that is for the Electro 35, but it sounds like you've reached it.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I no longer own my old Electro 35, but think I can offer some guidance for you. The meter, as I recall, meters the entire scene...which works fine for outdoor shots. However, unless your indoor shots are fairly evenly lighted, the meter is often "fooled", which is why flash is usually recommended for indoor shots with this camera. Think of this scenario - knowing that the meter will attempt to set exposure for whatever it reads, as 18% gray: you have a person sitting in a chair or on a couch, with a floor or table lamp lighting the walls behind and around him. The walls occupy a significantly greater portion of the picture frame than the person does, and the walls are more brightly lit than the person, and also are a lighter color temperature than the person's complexion. The meter will be significantly influenced by the brightness of the walls and attempt to set exposure to render it 18% grey, and, of course the person will have less exposure - and therefore be underexposed. A second scenario is that meters are less sensitive to lower light than they are to stronger light levels, so exposure in lower light will be less reliable.</p>

<p>Hi both, thanks for the replies and the warm welcome.</p>

<p>I should have pointed out that I do have a few years experience with digital cameras ranging from the Nikon D700 to my current Fuji X-E2 and have a good grasp of the exposure triangle and basic to intermediate techniques but film photography is a different beast altogether!</p>

<p>The advice regarding the metering sounds very familiar, I do have large cream walls lit only by a lamp in the room and some natural light and so that makes sense. I suppose I'm used to matrix metering and not having to worry, the problem with the Yashica is that there is no exposure lock so I can't meter off something else before taking the photo.<br>

I just wondered if using a higher iso(asa) I would have gotten a better exposure?<br>

<br />Because the Yashica is an aperture priority camera I have no idea what shutter speed it decided on but I definitely didn't max it out as the slowest it will shoot is 30 seconds and I know that it wasn't slower than 1/30th or else the warning bulb would have come on.<br>

I've just shot my second role today, all outdoors; as long as they come out right I'll keep perservering with film and perhaps either get the flash as suggested or use my digital for indoors. I do love the feel of my film camera though!<br>

<br />Any advice of getting around the metering situation in natural light would be welcome though, perhaps nudging my ASA dial in those situations? would that work? I know iso 200 isn't really advised for indoors so will avoid that again.</p>

<p>Thanks again</p>

<p>Did you use print (negative) or slide (positive) film? You can't judge exposure from prints; the variation in brightness across the image may have fooled the exposure in the print machine. Underexposed slides would indicate, as others have said, the meter was fooled by a light source. Depending on the acceptance angle (field of view) of the meter, it's possible to fool the meter even if the light source is not in the frame.</p>

<p>Yes- you can "trick" the exposure by selecting a higher or lower ISO...just remember what the camera's exposure meter is capturing and adjust from there. The lens on that body is wonderfully sharp and the rangefinder is also very good, so if you are shooting handheld below 1/50 and getting unsharp pictures even with accurate focusing, you can reasonably assume some blur due to camera/photographer movement, which could be easily rectified by bracing them camera, either on a tripod or other solid surface.</p>

Thankyou again, it was print (negative) and Admittedly

not the best quality stuff. I will get some scans up so you

can see the pics yourselves if it helps.

 

Perhaps I will try and scan myself and post processing in

lightroom although i did want to get away from all that,

hence experimenting with film!

 

I was relatively happy with my focusing considering I'd

never used manual focus before.

<p>It's been mentioned that your camera is aperture priority. I believe this model has no automation. F stops and shutter speeds are are at the option of the photographer.</p>

Hi Paul. it's an aperture priority camera. The only

manual control the photographer has is iso, focus and

aperture. It's a leaf shutter and because it's electrically

powered, stepless. It can be operated without a battery

but only at the default 1/500th of a second.

<p>Ry,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>...but film photography is a different beast altogether.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't take this the wrong way, but frankly, film photography isn't much different. Most of it is actually the same. For me, there is no real difference between a Nikon DSLR or SLR - they work the same, do the same just use a different way of registering the image. I do not mean this to correct you, but mostly to take away any 'fear' when working with film; if you're used to shooting digital, just work as you are used to, and you will get decent negatives.</p>

<p>The thing it also holds in common with digital is that you need to get used to a body; its quirks, its metering, the handling. This is really independent from the recording medium.<br>

What I do find is that older meters tend to 'cut out' earlier when it gets too dark to meter reliably. Not quite sure about this camera, but sensitivity at low(er) light levels is an area where improvements are certainly noticeable.</p>

<p>Hi Wouter, I'm not taking anything the wrong way, thanks for the input. I think what I meant was that in the digital realm it's a much quicker process learning from your errors and a bit easier correcting for them (usually chimp at the photo you just took, see if anything has gone wrong, adjust shutter/aperture/exposure comp and take again)</p>

<p>With film you never know what you did wrong until the photos come back!</p>

<p>You're right about learning the quirks of a camera, I'm used to cutting edge metering and these old film camera just haven't got that; they make you slow down and work a little harder for the shot. But I'm not complaining as this is what I'm really hoping to get out of shooting film, to make me a better photographer in both film and digital mediums. </p>

<p>400 speed film does make it easier to shoot under low light. But if your meter is being fooled it won't necessarily solve your problem. If you are using 200 speed film and your meter is set at 200 and you're on aperture priority at 2.8, let's say the meter is setting the shutter at 1/30. If you switch to 400 film and set the meter at 400, the meter will set the exposure at 1/60. If 1/30 for 200 was underexposed, 1/60 at 400 will also be underexposed.<br /><br />What you can do is trick the meter by leaving the meter set at 200 while shooting 400 speed film. All else being equal, the pictures will be one stop brighter. But if they were more than one stop underexposed in the first place, they still won't be bright enough. If that's the case, you can take the trick further by setting the meter at 100 or 50 or even 25. But you have to have sense of how many stops the meter is underexposing in the first place. Unfortuantely, in the situation you have described the amount of underexposure is probably not consistant from shot to shot.<br /><br />If the camera doesn't give you manual control or allow you to lock a meter, reading, what you really need to do is work with the camera to make sure it is metering properly. Rather than having a bright light (a lamp for example) in the picture, move around until the lamp is out of the picture, preferably behind the camera or off to the side of the camera with the light falling on the subject. Instead of having the subject in front of a light colored wall, move the camera or subject so the subject is in front of something darker. <br /><br />Finally, keep in mind that sometimes there simply isn't enough light to shoot without flash. And even if there is enough light, it's not always good light.</p>

<p>I have used a lot of Yashica 35 and most of mine were in mint conditions, but that was not common. Usually, the battery is dead, even locked up the battery compartment. Without battery you still can take nice picture but that is really difficult. Also, if you replace the battery by some new ones, the meter is not that accurate, so you have to get around that too, do not trust the meter as is. It may also have mechanical problems.</p>

<p>Anyway, check if you have a good battery, and the compartment is in good condition. Otherwise, you cannot use it</p>

<p>I'm not at home where my old Yashica lives but it's worth checking on the correct battery for that camera. I think they used mercury cell batteries for many cameras; for disposal reasons that type of battery hasn't been available for years. It had a slightly different power output than the batteries we've used for years. There may be substitutes, but I might check if the camera was designed to use a mercury cell in which case you'll have to find a modern equivalent.</p>