D700 underexposing with the 105

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by cindygillespie, Mar 24, 2012.

  1. I have been playing with my new toy (the D700)... I have to say it is AMAZING and I am enjoying it very much thanks to all of you that helped in me making my decision. I think that my D7000 has been lonely in it's bag though.
    Here's my question...
    I haven't tested all my lenses only my 50mm and my 105mm (all Nikon glass)
    I noticed the exposure and metering were dead on with the 50mm. However.. while out shooting yesterday I got some amazing results BUT, it seems that with the 105 I am having to overexpose by one stop in order for it to be exposed properly visibly and in the histogram.
    Am I doing something wrong? Is the lens altering the meter due to it being chubby? LOL
    Thank you all once again for your thoughts and time.
  2. mm Could you post an example picture ?

    A lot depends on subject and metering mode used...
  3. Which 105mm lens? Nikon must have made at least half-a-dozen different 105s, not counting all the 3rd party 105mm lenses available.
    Cynthia, count yourself lucky that your D700 underexposes. IME the D700 has a tendency to overexpose, which is far worse.
  4. 105 2.8 G
    I have never posted a picture via a discussion.. hope this works.
    I have spot metered on the center largest forward flower. And I shot these jpeg and raw...
  5. Rodeo Joe...
    I haven't tried the 24-70 and the 70-300 just yet. We have a raining day here in Michigan today.
    Don't get me wrong.. the camera is amazing... like I said it's dead on with the 50mm I just have to overexpose (more than on my D7000) for back lit subjects with the 105 maybe it's me. Or a learning curve I don't know.
  6. Is nothing wrong with your pictures/camera. I think your monitor needs calibration...Scenes with backlight, usually need some exposure compensation or spot mettering to achieve perfect results.
  7. Paul... Nope... Monitor is calibrated with professional labs and spider (dead on). I think that the focused portion of the image that I metered exact (one stop over exposed for back lighting) is dark...guess I will play a bit more. Thank you !!!!
  8. Paul... Nope... Monitor is calibrated with professional labs and spider (dead on). I think that the focused portion of the image that I metered exact (one stop over exposed for back lighting) is dark...guess I will play a bit more. Thank you !!!!
  9. You're welcome. Try to use only one focus point combined with spot mettering...
  10. I did... that was my whole point... one focus point, spot metered... and it was still underexposed for back lighting. Like I said... it may be a learning curve. I will find out more tomorrow with better lighting and use the 50mm, 24-70 and 70-300 and see what how it handles those lenses.
  11. Cynthia
    You compensated for the back lighting but did you take into account that your meter sees every thing as middle gray? You subject is lighter then middle gray so you should have added a little more exposure compensation.
  12. Michael...
    That would make sense. There wasn't any gray in the pink blossoms you are right. THANK YOU ! I was beginning to think I was crazy. LOL The sample images were just straight jpegs out of the camera. I was able to fix the raw into some pretty amazing images.. especially the star magnolia. I like to shoot raw and jpeg as education to myself while adjusting to a new body.
  13. Cynthia, your "new toy" was purchased as a new item , or was second hand ?
  14. Then is nothing wrong with the aperture lever (not bent)...Hum...Test all your lenses, and after that if you feel the camera still underexpose, get intouch with Nikon regional service center.
  15. Ray House

    Ray House Ray House

    Since you are in manual mode using spot metering, I would consider under exposure to be user error. Some experimentation will give you an idea as to different tones to meter from.
  16. Cynthia,
    I don't know how close you were from the subject and how you did measure the light, but being in manual mode when you go closer than the minimum focusing distance for the lens (when acting as a "normal" one) magnification enters in the game and the closer you become till the 1:1 ratio the more you need to compensate compared to a previous metering, or you meter the light at the shooting position and it should be the better way. I make this point but you most probably took it into in consideration.
  17. I think Michael has nailed the problem. The spot meter will give the appropriate exposure to make whatever it's pointing at come out middle gray. If you point it at something lighter than middle gray (like white flowers), the picture will be underexposed. If you point it at something darker, the pic will be overexposed. Spot metering is an effective method to use when your subject takes up only a small part of the frame, but you have to remember that it's only giving you a starting value and you have to adjust it from there (unless, of course, you can find something in the scene that actually represents middle gray to take a meter reading from).
  18. Following Cory post after Michael's, I'd add that you shall take into consideration that your spot meter is evaluating an area corresponding to an angle of 1.5ยบ and looks at it as if it was a neutral area (+/- equal to a 18% gray card), therefore you have to see if that area is a real neutral, a shadow, a highlight or a mixed one and take it or introduce a compensation.
    Taking the principles from the Zone System: it will meter for zone V; if you meter a shadow you'll need -2 EV to bring it back to zone III (where there is some visible information); a highlight are will need +2 EV to take it to zone VIII (here you have the whites and avoid blowing up the highlights - but don't forget this difference depends on the dynamic range of the sensors, the new ones extending after zone VIII and RAW files giving you some headroom); if your spot is measuring a mixed area you have to evaluate the compensation to apply or even using bracketing

Share This Page