Do I Need Exposure Compensation When Shooting In Manual Mode

<p>I shoot almost strictly in manual mode and can easily fix a photo when it is under/over exposed by adjusting my shutter & f-stop. I've never really seen much need for exposure compensation. Am I missing something or is it basically a cheat that compensates when you are not doing it manually? Thanks</p>

<p>You can't anyway.<br />That is you cannot use "Exposure Compensation", when the camera is if full manual mode.</p>

<p>"Exposure Compensation" is a function of <em>compensation</em> for an <strong>automatic</strong> function of the camera; allowing the Photographer to manually correct, what the camera has done. For example, if the camera is in Aperture Priority Mode, the camera, by use of its TTL Light Meter will automatically select the Shutter Speed. Using "Exposure Compensation" the Photographer can manually override that automatic Shutter Speed Choice.</p>

<p>So, (if you are still using a 40D) you can use Exposure Compensation in Av; Tv and P Modes, but not in M Mode.<br>

Set the camera to M Mode and try to use Exposure Compensation as you would if you were using Av Mode – it just doesn’t work in M Mode. </p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>That is what I thought. Thank you</p>

<p>I have to respectfully disagree with William. Of course you can use exposure compensation in manual mode *<strong>if</strong>* you want to continuously bias the exposure meter for under/overexposure.</p>

<p>Inputting exposure compensation has the exact same effect in manual mode as it does in any automatic mode. <strong>It just biases the lightmeter by +/- <em>n</em> stops</strong>, and adjusts the *recommended* shutter speed or aperture displayed in the viewfinder by that amount of compensation. The difference is that in any automatic mode the camera selects and applies that shutter speed and/or aperture automatically, while in manual mode you need to manually select those inputs to "zero" the meter.</p>

<p>Say you are shooting at the beach on a bright sunny day, and you know that you will want to overexpose all of your manual mode shots by +1 stop so that the scene is rendered correctly. If you set your exposure compensation to +1.0 EV, when you have manually selected a shutter speed and/or aperture so that your meter reading is zeroed/centered, you know that your shots will be properly exposed (at +1EV) for the bright, sunny beach scenes.</p>

<p>Doing the above has the same effect as not dialing in any exposure compensation, but manually selecting a speed/aperture so that your meter reading is *not* zeroed/centered, but reads as +1.0 stops overexposed. Exact same result, just another way of arriving at your destination.</p>

<p>Another instance where this might be useful is when using a camera on which for some reason or another the lightmeter consistently reads low (or high), i.e. it is not properly calibrated for 18% grey. Set the exposure compensation to adjust for the inaccuracy, and now you can fire away (in any mode) without having to remember to always under/overexpose to adjust for the out-of-spec lightmeter readings.</p>

<p>Film shooters used to do this all the time when shooting in manual. Lots of photographers preferred to shoot Velvia 50 at EI 40, or Kodachrome 64 at EI 80. They could either set the ISO at 40/80, or set the ISO to box speed and dial in +/- 1/3 EV. Different journeys, same arrival at destination.</p>

<p>Nothing magical (or mysterious) about exposure compensation. Hope that hasn't confused you, and there is certainly nothing wrong with the way you are currently doing things. :-)</p>

<p>I would have thought "NO" as well and the question I ask is how do you work out the exposure in the first place? My guess is by judging the position of the needle* as you adjust aperture and shutter ... dead centre is what the camera thinks and off to either side is exposure compensation by the operator? If the camera added or deducted in addition that would negate the whole point of working in manual which is to impose your will on the camera.<br>

*In my camera by a number of vertical lines either side of centre.</p>

<p>It all depends. If you are shooting in manual mode then you don't need to use the exposure compensation facility because you can simply open up or close down 1/2 or 1 stop by using the aperture (or shutter-speed). In the case of my own cameras, adjusting the exposure compensation dial does nothing more than effectively change the ASA setting. One disadvantage of using exposure compensation is that you may forget to reset it afterwards - as I did the other day, over-exposing several frames by 2/3 stop!</p>

<p>If using auto ISO (on Nikon) and you want a specific combination of shutter speed and aperture, then exposure compensation might be needed if metering alone cannot deliver.</p>

<p>Michael, et al: I understand all your points.</p>

<p>I might not have made a crystal clear link in my answer: I did ask the OP if he were still using a Canon EOS 40D - and - when that camera is in M Mode it is not possible to activate the function "Exposure Compensation", hence:<br>

<strong>I was answering the OP specifically, for that (his) EOS 40D camera.</strong><br>

Also, <strong>I am reasonably confident that this functionality is common, for all Canon DSLR cameras - as it simply a physical impossibility to allocate the "Exposure Compensation" function to any dial, when the Camera is in Manual Mode. </strong></p>

<p>There might be DSLR’s where the functionality of “Exposure Compensation” is different to the functionality of Canon:<br>

<strong><em>I think that some Nikon DSLR’s move the centre bar in the Exposure Meter’s display, thus in effect allowing Exposure Compensation to operate in Manual Mode? - - -</em></strong></p>

<p>Your point is taken that with film cameras, the Film speed con be set other than the film's suggested ISO (ASA) and this would effectively work as an "Exposure Compensation" - although (splitting hairs) it is not actually the "Exposure Compensation" Function.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

I am "still" using a 40D not that that matters. Taken over 20K photos, the majority in manual. Basically

I change the aperture if more light is needed. When I trust the lighting and use automatic, well, no need to

use compensation. No reason to make it complicated.It can be useful if you want to use it but as far as I

am concerned it is just another complicated (or unnecessary)

way to make something easier to do.

William is correct, at least up through the 50D, which I use. In any mode with automatic control, exposure compensation

is set with the rear wheel. In manual mode, the rear wheel sets the aperture.

 

In other words, on these cameras, "manual" really means manual--you set things yourself. The only way to compensate is

to do it yourself--set the exposure at a value other than the one indicated by the meter, exactly as the OP is doing.

<blockquote>

<p>I've never really seen much need for exposure compensation. Am I missing something or is it basically a cheat that compensates when you are not doing it manually?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Congratulations, you are ahead of most "beginners". By using manual mode, you are controlling the camera, and not vice versa. I agree with Michael's comments on exposure compensation in manual mode in general, and will add the following:</p>

<p>- In manual mode, you can choose to adjust either the shutter speed or aperture for exposure compensation. In some situations, that may mean better motion or dof capture.</p>

<p>- For static shots under harsh lighting conditions, bracketing exposure and post processing with HDR can salvage/improve the final result.</p>

<p>- For semi-static shots, such as the following, an immediate more exposed shot will allow you to merge the two and bring out the shadow details in the hair.</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/11123565</p>

<p>If you are a purist and consider my suggestions are "cheat", I offer my apology.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>It can be useful if you want to use it but as far as I am concerned it is just another complicated (or unnecessary) way to make something easier to do.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As someone with a technical background, you surely understand that improving a good design by another 5% can mean 95% of the overall effort. The same holds true in photography. That last 5% improvement may or may not be important, or even observable. But some would consider the effort worthy.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I've never really seen much need for exposure compensation. Am I missing something or is it basically a cheat that compensates when you are not doing it manually?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Long ago when there were no automatic exposure camera nobody would know what exposure compensation was. After autoexposure was invented, and at times it over or under expose a picture so instead of having to switch back to manual mode, the exposure compensation dial was invented.</p>

<p>I used the word <em>"still"</em> to identify that the OP was <em>still</em> using that <em>particular</em> camera and had not changed to another: I had identified that a 40D was the camera used by the OP at an earlier point in time.<br>

<br />The word "still" was not to suggest that a 40D is inferior. I use, amongst other cameras, a 20D.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>I strongly disagree with Robert K ... after all what is the point of paying for a camera which is very capable of quickly getting the answer for you and then working in manual .. really quite illogical [ ignoring the fact that 'simple' cameras' are not made these days ]</p>

<p>NO ... my attitude is that I try and hope I recognise situations where I need to work in manual and do so ... a very small proportion of the shots I take ... the rest of the time I give the camera its head to use a horse riding term:-)</p>

<p>A second attitude is that I aim to obtain a file which will be suitable to be turned into the final product in editing. I believe I am a disciple of Ansell Adams with this as I read recently. He used a darkroom I use a computer. Which enables me to do so much more much quicker than ever I did in the fume room</p>

<p>I shot Manual out of neccessity for perhaps fifty years and luxuriate in the help the modern camera gives me, has given me the past decade :-)</p>

<p>I remember back when I bought my first 'automation', it just estimated the exposure, nothing else. The 'experts' of the time said it would never work .... in fact the only bad exposure I got was when I once thought I knew better and over rode the camera ... LOL<br>

That was back in the sixties with just one of the many cameras I have owned and used and only in the last decade have I got truely clever cameras with digital which enables me to concentrate of the image rather than the technicalities for most images.</p>

<p>Obviously for a newbie, and this forum is for them, I strongly advise that they learn the technicalities and practice them until when they are needed they can use them to over ride their gear. But do not discard the help the geeks at the factory have organised for you to get good results which builds your confidence in the very complicated activity called photography. The essence of which is getting images with meaning not operating a machine.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"- In manual mode, you can choose to adjust <strong><em>either</em></strong> the <em><strong>shutter speed</strong></em> or <strong><em>aperture</em></strong> for exposure compensation. In some situations, that may mean better motion or dof capture."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You can also choose to adjust the ISO to give the effect of "Exposure Compensation".</p>

<p>WW</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I strongly disagree with Robert K ... after all what is the point of paying for a camera which is very capable of quickly getting the answer for you and then working in manual .. really quite illogical [ ignoring the fact that 'simple' cameras' are not made these days ]</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

The reason I buy a camera with a meter and all the auto modes is that that is all I can buy. There is no camera with manual exposure only available today. </p>

<p>Why would anyone shoot strictly in manual mode in varying situations like a walk-around. It just means a lot more dial-rolling. I do use manual mode for people at events where the lighting is all very similar so that the meter doesn't get confused by the rest of the scene and keep changing the exposure.<br>

I often used to put the compensation down by 1/3 on Nikons outdoors and 1/3 up on Canons indoors for what it is worth :)</p>

<p>I consider people using manual all the time to be a minor and pretty harmless form of masochism :-)<br>

Surely BeBu that is what I said if you read me properly ... use what you pay for except for when what you pay for doesn't deliver the goods ....THEN you should take charge.<br>

Since I read "Expose to the right" [LuminousLandscape] I have set my camera to minus one stop to avoid blowing highlights and blinkies occur less frequently and usually only on unimportant parts of the shot. But of course I put every file through my editor, I consider the editor a natural part of the process of making photographs.</p>

<p>Oh JC! I wanted my camera manual only but there is no such animal nowaday. And if there is they would be more expensive than one with all the bells and whistles. So to buy a camera with all the bells and whistles and not using although features in my opinion is accepting what I can afford and not being picky.</p>

<p>Just CA the mode dial to M ? :-)</p>

<p>Why would you want to use exposure compensation in manual? I shoot in manual because I want to quickly see where I am (and it stays no matter how I frame the subject (and any adjustment is from a fixed point) and don't need to look at exposure compensation. I also don't need something else I can forget I have on and shouldn't. I don't have that adjustment on my sekonic light meter or on the AB trigger/meter and if I forget there is compensation in the camera I could have problems. It's why I spot meter/focus in manual.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>By using manual mode, you are controlling the camera, and not vice versa.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In A/Av or S/Tv mode, you have the same level of control, except that the camera pre-sets your exposure based on the aperture/shutterspeed you already set before. And after that, I still then have exposure compensation to tweak the exposure to taste.... Where's the difference?<br>

To me, it's more important you <em>understand</em> your exposure settings, than you actually set them manually all the time. I see plenty photographers shoot in manual mode, and still not think about the actual choices for aperture or shutterspeed. Manual only teaches you something if you're actually thinking about it. And either way, it doesn't make for better photos - the only thing that matters is that you nail the exposure, in whatever mode you prefer to use your camera.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>It can be useful if you want to use it but as far as I am concerned it is just another complicated (or unnecessary) way to make something easier to do.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is overlooking one massive point, I think, and that's working in wildly varying lighting conditions. For 95% of my photography, I care about the aperture, and choose ISO such that my shuttertimes will be fast enough (if not using tripod). Setting the camera to A/Av gives me a shutterspeed already set to a proper value, or very close to it. In most cases, the metering will be OK (and I took the time to understand how the lightmeter reacts, and how to compensate), so I can just go ahead and shoot. I change the aperture, and immediately shutterspeed changes with it, keeping the same EV, which in 90% of the cases is exactly what I'd want. With manual, I have to change the shutterspeed each time too, adding time it takes to actually take the photo - and some moments do pass.<br>

So, no, it is not more complicated nor unnecessary, but whether it has actual added value for your photography completely depends on circumstances. All of these modes have their pros and cons, and dismissing them because you're made to believe 'manual' is the only real deal in town is shortsighted.</p>

<p>1. The EC <strong>dial</strong> or <strong>button</strong> will not work in Manual mode.</p>

<p>2. The need for exposure composition is <strong>not related</strong> to what exposure mode you are in. It only depends on the meter, the scene, and your style of photography.</p>

<p>A similar question was asked earlier this month and I'll paraphrase what I wrote there... I think many new-ish photographers don't completely understand what <em>Exposure Compensation</em> (the feature) is. I think you'd be surprised at how many people think that <em>EC</em> somehow, as if by magic, adds light where there is too little and attenuates it when there's too much. As has been explained and debated above, that is not the case. There is no magic. EC simply adjusts the same parameters you would be adjusting yourself, if you were in manual mode.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Why would anyone shoot strictly in manual mode</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I think, as a rule, what mode you use shouldn't be a rule. I think people should use whatever mode makes them happy. I can't remember the last time I used anything other than M. Why? Probably for the same reason I'm not a good passenger or why I prefer a standard transmission to an automatic or flappy paddle or why I enjoy taking things apart just to see if I can put them back together. I don't know [shrugs]. I don't think I'm unique in that I enjoy the process of photography as much or more than the photographs, themselves. The photographs are the reward for someone else, taking them is mine.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Why would anyone shoot strictly in manual mode in varying situations like a walk-around.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />I'm by no means suggesting that. I shoot with manual mode in situations when there is time for me to adjust all the settings and the lighting remain somewhat constant (such as in a studio, landscapes, etc.). I shoot in auto mode in situations when I don't have the time to adjust the settings or when the lighting is changing (such as parades on the streets, etc.)</p>

<p>My congratulation to OP shooting in manual mode as a beginner is based on my personal experience. I only shot in manual mode with film bodies, and learned how each setting contributes to the exposure/sharpness/dof of an image. I could then adjust each of the settings for the *desired* exposure/sharpness/dof. IOW, shooting in manual mode is not ONLY about exposure. It is a great foundation when switching to auto modes on digital bodies, and understanding what those modes are doing or not doing. Those who do not start with manual mode typically would have a harder time learning about exposure/sharpness/dof.</p>

<p>Are there photographers who only shoot in manual mode? Of course there are. Maybe it is a matter of habit, and/or what suits their genres. Maybe they believe it gets them better results. It is not unlike making pasta. Most of us would be happy with dumping packaged linguine into boiling water. But there are those who would start with flour and eggs.</p>