Using Exposure Values for Film Photography

Help again,

 

Both Zeiss lenses I have make it possible to lock the shutter speed and f stop functions, to shoot on an Exposure Value scale, which is also printed on the lens. I get the feeling that EV use is more a generalized sort of way to shoot certain light conditions, rather than an exact or precise method...

 

is there any reason to try to use the EV scale right away or am I better off learning basic use of f stop, shutter speed and ISO settings instead?

 

Also, (another question) I'm getting the hint that different aperture settings result in varying depth of field. I sort of thought that smaller aperture (IE larger opening?) would be better in lower lighting, but not necessarily? In my earlier thread about shooting buildings at night, I said I'd used the aperture setting of f2.8. Not having gotten my film back yet, so not knowing what I've done, exactly, would I have gotten an image of a building in full focus in f2.8, or would I have needed to use a different setting to get a shot where everything is in focus?

 

 

Thanks, clearly I have a long ways to go in understanding my camera and its functions.

EVs CAN be handy on meterless cameras-whether you're estimating the exposure or using a lightmeter that reads directly in EV values.

 

My Hasselblad lenses all, by default, lock to their set EV value. In a lot of ways, it's convenient since I just set the meter I'm using to read in EVs, set that on the camera, and can prioritize either picking my desired aperture or shutter speed. With that said, it's kind of a 6 of one, half a dozen of the other issue for me-my Hasselblad is the only camera where I worry about the EV settings, but that's just because it's the "path of least resistance" for the lenses I have.

 

To answer the rest of your question-there's an old rule with 35mm film that the minimum hand-holdable shutter speed is the inverse of the focal length. For a 50mm lens, that would be 1/50 sec, or actually 1/60 on most cameras made in the last ~50 years. I find that can be iffy, and usually try to do double that or better whenever possible. Larger apertures allow you to use higher shutter speeds under the same light conditions. When trying to stop action in low light, or in the days before VR/IS(yes, it existed in the film days, and works every bit as well with film as it does with digital) that faster shutter speed can be the difference between getting a sharp photo and not. For stationary objects shot from a support(i.e. a tripod) don't worry AS MUCH about shutter speed(there are some nuances to this-often times with an SLR speeds in the range of 1/30 to 2s or so can still cause issues on a tripod if not using mirror lock-up) but instead pick the aperture that will give the DOF you need. Alternatively, most lenses have a "sweet spot" for optimum sharpness-often 1-2 stops from wide open, or somewhere around f/5.6 or f/8, and use this if you want to get the most out of your lens.

How much you expose the film is a result of how much light you let in with the aperture, and how long you let it in with the shutter. Time/volume ratio.

If you move the camera or the light moves while you’re letting that light in you’ll smear the light all over the film.

The the mostest simplest way I can describe it.

 

Additionally,

Smaller number = bigger aperture = more light.

 

Pick an ISO and stick with it to reduce the variables initially until you learn how to expose it a bit.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Moving On

As well as I know, EV was invented some years ago to simplify things.

 

It never caught on as well as it might have, though is sometimes used in descriptions,

such as the sensitivity of light meters. (EV at a specified ASA value.). It is especially

convenient in that case, as it allows ignoring what a light meter doesn't care about.

 

As noted, some cameras, maybe more likely with fixed lenses, have EV scales.

But it isn't so hard to remember, one stop on the shutter speed dial for each

one on the aperture dial.

 

Without EV, you think a little more about the shutter speed needed to stop

subject motion, or camera motion. You also think about aperture and depth

of field.

 

As for buildings, usually you will be far enough away, and they are flat enough,

not to be a problem. You still have to get the focus right, though.

 

Depth of field allows for two thing: one is objects at different distances,

but the other is focus accuracy. Depth of field is what allows for fixed focus

cameras, like many simpler ones.

 

Rangefinder cameras, and the central spot in many SLR view screens, allows

for especially accurate manual focus. With auto-focus cameras, it is easy to

forget how it used to be with only manual focus lenses.

EVs were very handy for electronic fill flash with a leaf shutter.

I really find the EV "simplification" to be obnoxious, although I have to confess that when I have used some cameras (like the Contaflex) it's not so bad in practice.

 

Then again, I grew up with f/stops and shutter speeds....

As well as I know, EV was invented some years ago to simplify things.

 

It never caught on as well as it might have, though is sometimes used in descriptions,

such as the sensitivity of light meters. (EV at a specified ASA value.). It is especially

convenient in that case, as it allows ignoring what a light meter doesn't care about.

 

As noted, some cameras, maybe more likely with fixed lenses, have EV scales.

But it isn't so hard to remember, one stop on the shutter speed dial for each

one on the aperture dial.

 

Without EV, you think a little more about the shutter speed needed to stop

subject motion, or camera motion. You also think about aperture and depth

of field.

 

As for buildings, usually you will be far enough away, and they are flat enough,

not to be a problem. You still have to get the focus right, though.

 

Depth of field allows for two thing: one is objects at different distances,

but the other is focus accuracy. Depth of field is what allows for fixed focus

cameras, like many simpler ones.

 

Rangefinder cameras, and the central spot in many SLR view screens, allows

for especially accurate manual focus. With auto-focus cameras, it is easy to

forget how it used to be with only manual focus lenses.

Yeah it was invented some years ago at least 50 years ago.

"...or am I better off learning basic use of f stop, shutter speed and ISO settings instead?"

 

- Yes. Most definitely.

I don't know anyone that bothers to even look at those EV numbers, let alone memorise them. They only take notice of the shutter and aperture numbers. The 'blad's interlock system holds the same exposure when you want to change aperture or shutter speed together, but if you actually need to change the overall exposure it's a royal PITA. It's a misplaced 'foolproof' mechanism that's more suited to a cheap amateur snapshot camera than a professional tool.

 

An old digital camera with full manual (PASM) control can be picked up dirt cheap, and is an ideal tool to learn about exposure on.

 

Anything you can do with a film camera can be done on a digital that has manual control over aperture, shutter speed and ISO. With the added advantage that you can immediately see the effect of altering these parameters. And it costs you near to nothing to learn.

 

Film OTOH takes a lot longer to learn on, and is quite expensive while you do so.

The EV system is anachronistic, but useful. You're much better off learning about the variables of shutter speed, aperture and ISO. I've used cameras for over 50 years which have both EV and aperture/shutter speed scales, and personally found understanding the basics far outweighs the "convenience" of EV values.

. . . is there any reason to try to use the EV scale right away or am I better off learning basic use of f stop, shutter speed and ISO settings instead?

 

You are better off to learn basic F/Stop, Shutter Speed and ISO. It will be easier and it is how most Photographers communicate.

 

(possibly unfortunately), I mentioned EV and EV Tables in your previous thread and because of that mention, you might have concluded that I meant EV Tables and using EV the EV system was the best general system to use - that was not my intention.

 

The mention of an EV Table was - to show you a tool that you could use when you don't a light meter, so you could use the 'description' of the scene in the EV Table as your reference, then you could make an informed guess at the exposure that you need.

 

Although I am quite familiar with EV Tables, Light Meters with EV Numbers and how to use EV Numbers, I think and compute exposures is in F/Stop Shutter Speed and ISO.

 

As a practical example – although I “know” that an indoor scene in a brightly lit hall is about EV = 7, I don’t think in the EV number, rather I think - “this is about F/2.8 @ 1/200s @ ISO1600” . . . and when I have a front lit sunlight scene “this is about F/8 @ 1/200s @ ISO50”.

 

The reason that I tend to ‘think’ around a base Shutter Speed of 1/200s, is because that’s a safe Flash Sync Speed for my gear and I use Flash as Fill quite a bit.

 

If necessary I will ‘compute’ in F/Stop, Shutter Speed and ISO – for example the indoor hall, I will compute “F/2.8 @ 1/200s @ ISO1600” is equivalent to “F/2 @ 1/200s @ ISO800” is equivalent to “F/1.4 @ 1/200s @ ISO400” etc.

 

Using a Light Meter or a Digital Camera’s Light Meter is a far quicker and simpler and usually more accurate method of getting ‘correct exposures’ for your film camera that has no light meter, these were suggestions in your previous thread and again similar has been mentioned in this thread. I think you mentioned on that last thread you have a digital camera, anyway.

 

I have explained the way I think about exposures, so, if you want to get an understanding of how to make mental exposure calculations, you have a method. Additionally some people, like me, when using a Light Meter, or Camera with TTL Metering in it, simply want to have an idea of what the computer should be telling them, before the computer spits out the answer. For example having read the menu and noted what people have ordered, I automatically calculate an approximation of the account when I am at dinner in a restaurant, etc. And, in that last thread you mentioned that you were 'having fun' with your Film Camera, in this case you might want to proceed along a more "old fashioned" path for some of your learning journey.

 

***

 

Also, (another question) I'm getting the hint that different aperture settings result in varying depth of field. I sort of thought that smaller aperture (IE larger opening?) would be better in lower lighting, but not necessarily? In my earlier thread about shooting buildings at night, I said I'd used the aperture setting of f2.8. . .

 

Firstly, just to clear up one error of word usage / meanings – “I sort of thought that smaller aperture (IE larger opening?) would be better in lower lighting.”

A smaller aperture is a smaller opening. A larger aperture has a smaller F/Number.

 

*

 

Aperture does have a relationship to Depth of Field –

In simple terms -

If you keep CONSTANT the:

 

Focal Length of the Lens

The Camera Format

The Subject Distance

Then – a larger aperture (e.g. nearer f/2.8 ) will give you shallower Depth of Field

Similarly - a smaller aperture ( e.g. nearer f/22) will give you a wider Depth of Field

 

More technically and additionally, Depth of Field is somewhat a perception rather than a quantitative absolute, therefore also to be considered are:

 

The Final Image Size and Enlargement

The Viewing Distance of the Final Image

 

A simple example is a very large Billboard Poster – these images are viewed at long distances and many will seem to have a suitable DoF, but if viewed at ten feet would appear quite blurry – this also can be a function of the printing of the image, but I think it is good a simple example to illustrate the point.

 

*

 

Aperture also has a relationship to ISO and Shutter Speed

This is the more important bit to consider first when you are choosing the exposure parameters to use.

 

When using Film (assuming you are not Pulling or Pushing the Development), you have your ISO fixed at the Film’s ISO recommendation. This leaves choices for Shutter Speed and Aperture. BOTH of these two exposure elements have to be considered as to how they may affect the final image.

 

Aperture will have an effect on DoF, an equally important consideration is Shutter Speed will have an effect on Movement. Movement can be either Subject Movement or Camera Movement or both. Also we may consider Aperture to have an effect of Image Quality, often choosing to use a Lens nearer the mid-range of its Apertures to allow better Sharpness (than when using a large Aperture, e.g. the lens "wide open", at its Maximum Aperture) and to avoid Diffraction (at very small Apertures).

 

Additionally, when using film, you might have to consider Reciprocity Effect if you choose to use very fast or very slow Shutter Speeds.

 

As a practical example, you might have a night time scene, like in your previous thread, and let’s say you have calculated a suitable exposure is: F/8 @ 1/8th @ ISO400. And you have 400ISO film.

 

Now let’s also assume that you don’t have your tripod with you. In this case, a good line of thinking would be “I think that I need a fast Shutter Speed so I don’t get Camera Movement Blur, so, F/8 @ 1/8th @ ISO400 ≡ F/2.8 @ 1/60 @ ISO400, so I will use 1/60th as my Shutter Speed, because it is more important to get a non blurry picture than get all hung up on Depth of Field."

 

On the other hand, if you had a tripod – then using F/8 and 1/8th could be a good choice and give you the best of both DoF and the confidence that the Tripod would keep your camera steady: but as another example, IF that night scene had moving subjects (for example brightly lit trees were swaying in the breeze) then you must consider if you want to render those trees relatively sharp with minimal movement blur, or not.

 

WW

"

 

The 'blad's interlock system holds the same exposure when you want to change aperture or shutter speed together, but if you actually need to change the overall exposure it's a royal PITA. It's a misplaced 'foolproof' mechanism that's more suited to a cheap amateur snapshot camera than a professional tool.

 

A little harsh, I'd say. I've never heard of anyone - including myself - who felt that way.

A little harsh, I'd say. I've never heard of anyone - including myself - who felt that way.

 

- How many professional 'blad users have you polled?

- How many professional 'blad users have you polled?

I never have a Blad but to increase of decrease exposure can you just change the EV number?

I never have a Blad but to increase of decrease exposure can you just change the EV number?

 

- That's the point really. The EV system interlocks aperture and shutter-speed in such a way that the exposure is kept constant. E.g. f/8 locks to 1/125th, f/5.6 locks to 1/250th etc.

 

To change the exposure you have to 'unclick' the EV setting and reset it to another value.

 

I suppose the thinking behind it was to make accidentally moving the control ring not ruin the exposure, or to make synchro-sun use easier. Hence my comment about such a foolproofing system being more appropriate to a snapshot camera.

 

There are quite a few older cameras that adopted such an EV interlock system - Retina IIC for one. Personally I find such systems extremely irritating to use. You wouldn't want to be a bracketing addict using one!

I agree - that IS the point.

 

On the topic/poll regarding "Hasselblad's EV Interlock System" - personally I stand in the "it's a big hassle" camp. We ran 'blads for most of our Studio Portraiture and for the 'Medium Format Wedding Formals' as these was named years ago. No doubt that 'blads were exceptionally capable and sported high quality glass; from a marketing point of view the discerning Customers were usually impressed if a W&P Studio ran 'blads and seemed happy to pay a premium for that. But later, we and several other larger W&P Studios moved to 645 systems, favouring the lighter weight, immediacy of rectangular format, more frames per roll, and faster moving on the exposure changes; additionally the cost – we could buy almost two 645 kits (Mamiya) for one ‘blad and an 80mm lens: 645 became more of the ‘staple camera’ for most of the Wedding’s coverage – the ‘blad’s EV Locking System was not missed, one iota by us, nor quite a few others of our ilk, in similar Photography businesses.

 

WW

One of the other "pro" manufacturers to implement the EV system was F&H. I've never had a Rolleiflex that used it, but my Rollecord Va has it.

 

I don't know if the "lock" is abnormally weak on my 'cord or if it's designed to be this way, but you just about have to force it to "lock" the rings together, and it takes almost no effort to bypass the EV setting. If I'm not mistaken, 'flexes that have it require you turning a knob to lock/unlock the shutter wheels.

 

I use the EV system on my Hasselblad because it's easier-at least on the chrome lenses I have-to use it than to not. If there was a way to permanently "unlock" the shutter and aperture rings, I'd do it. I still like my Hasselblad in spite of the EV lock, not because of it. The lock IS a royal pain in the studio because at least for the way I'm set up, the shutter speed doesn't matter within reason(I'd probably need 1/2 second or better at the typical apertures I'm using to see ANY contribution from the modeling lights) but I still like to keep the shutter speed at the highest the camera will support. I'd like to ONLY change apertures...although admittedly I just have to hold in the tab to keep it unlocked and set the aperture where I want it.

 

Fortunately, both my Minolta incident meter and the metering app I use on my iPhone can be set to read in EVs-I just

Edited November 16, 2018 by ben_hutcherson

I've never used a Hasselblad, but my 3 Rolleiflex TLRs all had an easily turned off EV lock. My first move with all of them was to turn it off and leave it that way. I think that the EV system was a misguided attempt to simplify exposure which didn't really accomplish much in that regard.

I think that the EV system was a misguided attempt to simplify exposure which didn't really accomplish much in that regard.

 

I think "misguided" is not quite right. Perhaps though it was the beginning of "automation", even though the use of an EV scale was semi-automatic. All the cameras with EV scales, as far as I'm aware, still had full manual operation so you weren't left high and dry in that respect. For the mass market, after a while, 35mm cameras had Automatic, EV scales and manual features. Then they progressed to become electronic automatic devices, and some medium format cameras were as well

 

So the way I look at it, the EV scale feature was the beginning of a new evolution in consumer camera design, and yes, to simplify exposure, but which led to automatic exposure in later point & shoots, both film and digital

I think "misguided" is not quite right. Perhaps though it was the beginning of "automation", even though the use of an EV scale was semi-automatic. All the cameras with EV scales, as far as I'm aware, still had full manual operation so you weren't left high and dry in that respect. For the mass market, after a while, 35mm cameras had Automatic, EV scales and manual features. Then they progressed to become electronic automatic devices, and some medium format cameras were as well

 

So the way I look at it, the EV scale feature was the beginning of a new evolution in consumer camera design, and yes, to simplify exposure, but which led to automatic exposure in later point & shoots, both film and digital

You're right that the EV system was a beginning step on the road to full exposure automation, but I think it was misguided in the sense that equivalent exposures can work badly because a slow shutter speed can be ignored (leading to camera shake and unsharp results) or a large aperture can be set (leading to shallow depth of field when more might be desirable, as for landscapes). By simply transferring an EV number from a meter to the camera, the photographer, especially a beginner, is less likely to be cognizant of the effects of different apertures and shutter speeds. I've taught beginning photography classes since 2000 and I have seen the results of automated exposure systems. While many students get technically acceptable results much of the time, they frequently have no idea how they got them and can't reproduce them again in a different situation. For most amateurs who aren't interested in anything technical, automation is great and obviously leads to better results most of the time, and that is by far the largest market so manufacturers have pursued it.

When I was young, I inherited some cameras from my grandfather, and at least one had EV numbers on it.

I don't think it had the lock mentioned. That was from the time of handheld, uncoupled, meters, so you had

to somehow get the exposure from the meter to the camera.

 

Since addition is something we learn early, and are pretty good at, reading an EV value off a meter,

and then finding two numbers to add to it on the camera dials isn't so hard to do.

 

Now, consider the case of a modern aperture or shutter priority camera.

With EV, one could set either aperture or shutter, remember the EV number on the dial

set, subtract that from the EV from the meter, and set the other dial as appropriate.

 

As with either A or S mode, one has to know what to do when one gets to the end

of one of the scales. It might be just a tiny bit easier than using the dial on the meter

that will convert to shutter speed and f/stop values and transferring them.

 

It can uncouple you from thinking about actual shutter speeds or f/stops, but

it doesn't have to do that. (Unless there are scales with only EV numbers.)

 

The convenience of M mode on automatic cameras, is that you have at least

a little thought between the meter and exposure. A chance to decide if it is

really what you want. If you don't put in any thought, but just adjust the dials,

then it isn't really any different. I bought my Nikon FM just after the FE came

out. At the time, I thought manual was the right way to go. I probably

still do. But even so, my digital SLRs are most often on P.

 

Partly that is because built-in metering is better now. With the FM, I point to

the appropriate part of the scene, meter, then shoot appropriately. I know that

it will keep that exposure, maybe for a few shots. Much easier than exposure

lock buttons on more automatic cameras.

but I think it was misguided in the sense that equivalent exposures can work badly because a slow shutter speed can be ignored (leading to camera shake and unsharp results) or a large aperture can be set (leading to shallow depth of field when more might be desirable, as for landscapes). By simply transferring an EV number from a meter to the camera, the photographer, especially a beginner, is less likely to be cognizant of the effects of different apertures and shutter speeds.

 

We should make a distinction between beginners when EV scales first appeared, to beginners of today

 

A beginner had the option of using full manual control as well as the EV scale on their camera in those early days say, in the 1950s. If a beginner bought a German made folder in the 50s with the EV feature, no doubt they learned first what both the manual operation and EV were all about, and with that knowledge, went ahead and started using the camera.

 

For a beginner of today, if keen on photography, would probably do no different, learn some basics then move on to learning more about the effects of various shutter speeds and aperture settings/combinations. Isn't this what your students are supposed to be achieving ?, no sense in putting the cart before the horse and using the EV scale before learning what it's for and how to use it

 

Once full manual operation has been learned, only then will the EV scale be understood as an extra feature, useful in situations where a quick change of shutter/aperture setting is required without losing correct exposure evaluation for unchanging lighting conditions like at shows on sunny days, where there could be both static and moving subjects

I don't know if you have teaching experience, but I have had many students who are looking for the easiest way (as opposed to the best way) to do do things. You are absolutely right that an interested beginner would want to learn about the basics and then use the controls of the camera to make interesting and creative images. My point about the EV system is that it attempts to paper over the results of different f/stop/shutter speed combinations and simply concentrates on proper exposure. f/22 @ 1/8 looks a lot different from f/2 @ 1/1000, but they will be represented by the same EV number. More automated exposure systems obviated the need for the EV system, and it largely disappeared from cameras except for Hasseblads. As I explain to my students, beginning photography on film with a 1970's era Pentax K 1000 can seem like juggling 3 or 4 balls in the air simultaneously, but eventually with some practice most people can do this. I'm grateful that the cameras that my students use don't have the EV system to confuse them--it would add another ball to the juggling act.

I don't know if you have teaching experience, but I have had many students who are looking for the easiest way (as opposed to the best way) to do do things. You are absolutely right that an interested beginner would want to learn about the basics and then use the controls of the camera to make interesting and creative images. My point about the EV system is that it attempts to paper over the results of different f/stop/shutter speed combinations and simply concentrates on proper exposure. f/22 @ 1/8 looks a lot different from f/2 @ 1/1000, but they will be represented by the same EV number. More automated exposure systems obviated the need for the EV system, and it largely disappeared from cameras except for Hasseblads. As I explain to my students, beginning photography on film with a 1970's era Pentax K 1000 can seem like juggling 3 or 4 balls in the air simultaneously, but eventually with some practice most people can do this. I'm grateful that the cameras that my students use don't have the EV system to confuse them--it would add another ball to the juggling act.

 

Beginning on a 1970's camera is like juggling 3 or 4 balls? I can't never juggle 3 balls let alone 4 but it's easy for me to start with a Nikon F2AS back in 1977.

but it's easy for me to start with a Nikon F2AS back in 1977

 

- That was then. This is now.

The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.

 

The F2AS has no mention of EV values anywhere on it. You just twiddle the aperture and shutter-speed dials until the correct LED lights up.

 

"If it was good enough for me, and my father, and his father before him, then it's good enough for you my lad! Now eat your gruel and be thankful."

- That was then. This is now.

The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.

 

The F2AS has no mention of EV values anywhere on it. You just twiddle the aperture and shutter-speed dials until the correct LED lights up.

 

"If it was good enough for me, and my father, and his father before him, then it's good enough for you my lad! Now eat your gruel and be thankful."

AJG talked about the Pentax K1000 and since I hate that camera it wasn't my first but the the Nikon F2AS and the K1000 aren't that much different in term of usage. I mean neither is more difficult to use than the other. They are way more easy to set the controls than typing on my damn IPhone.