5D II LCD brightness

[ben_quinn1]

<p>I switched from 40d to 5d II, I found that the LCD appears a lot brighter on the 5D II. When hand held I usually shoot aperture priority with 1/3 stop over exposuer compensation. The LCD appears with almost burnt out highlights or just over exposed but when I check the histogram its fine or even underexposed (bunch up to the left). Therefore the LCD does not correspond to the LCD as I am used to on the 40d. I actually ended up underexposing a lot of frames as I belived my eyes over the histogram and adjusted the exposure compensation. Is this something other have found or am I just losing my mind. I experimented in varying light conditions so its not like I was shooting with a high sun on a sunny day with no shade/diffusion. </p>

[arthur_reyes1]

<p>I'd believe the histogram if you're saying its fine. The LCD on the 5DII changes in brightness depending if you're viewing in sun or shade. To the bottom right of the LCD there's a sensor. If you cover it up with your finger you should notice a change in brightness.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>I just got a 5DII and find the LCD to be the best I've ever used. Much better than my 40D! Nevertheless it is a LCD, not a calibrated monitor and is only intended to chimp composition and sharpness. </p>

<p>The obvious: if you think it is too bright, why not turn down the LCD brightness and level or two? </p>

<p>Incidentally, I find 5DII exposure very accurate and rarely need to stroke the QCD.</p>

[ben_quinn1]

<p>I did turn down the brightness a little but is still appeared over exposed compared to the histogram, perhaps the LCD sensor is screwed up so I will try experimenting with that. Apart from that the LCD is incredible compared to the 40d. </p>

[hawkman]

<p>Ben,<br>

It's the ambient light sensor on the 5DMKII LCD that agressively brightens the screen in harsh light, I had the same problem the first day I tried MKII, underexposing more than 100 frames, after that I turned the automatic brightness adjustment off. Turn it off and you will be fine.</p>

<p> </p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>Don't judge the quality of the images (at least in non-aesthetic terms) from what you see in the LCD. It is not an accurate representation of color and so forth.<br>

DO use the histogram and the highlight indicator. If the highlights are not flashing you are almost certainly fine.</p>

[jackaldridge]

<p>The LCD and histogram are both based on a jpeg image, even when you are shooting in RAW format.<br>

Turning off auto brightness should help greatly.<br>

Using the Live View for exposure validation is not (IMHO) a great idea. It can get you in the ballpark, but is not as accurate as the histogram.</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>Three auto levels and seven manual levels should give you enough options to find an acceptable setup!</p>

<p>But I agree that what you see on a calibrated monitor is not the same as what you see on the LCD, pretty much regardless of setting (my benchmark for this is a calibrated SpectraView, which is not quite as good as it gets, but pretty close). As other posters have said, just recognise that the LCD on the camera serves a different purpose.</p>

<p>Incidentally, if you shoot RAW+JPEG, and then use DPP to view both, you won't see much difference between them, because DPP picks up the same parameters for the RAW conversion that the camera uses to create the JPEG. However, the conversion algorithms are a bit different, so they won't be completely identical. Raw Image Task in ZoomBrowser was said to do the same conversion as the camera, but RIT does not support the most recent bodies such as the 5DII. If you use non-Canon software, there is no reason to expect the JPEG to look like the converted RAW, but if you are using DPP then this isn't a RAW v. JPEG issue.</p>

[ben_quinn1]

<p>I shoot raw, I still maintain the LCD does not reflect what is in the histogram as accurately as my 40d. Switching of auto brightness does improve it though. doh!</p>

[john_bellenis]

<p>It's only natural for people to crank up the brightness of their camera's LCD screen so that they can assess their images in bright light or backlit, awkward lighting situations. A nice bright LCD is a big plus and it wasn't meant to be a calibrated monitor. Obviously if they then use this overly bright screen to assess exposure (as opposed to just composition, shooting information, histogram, etc) and it looks right, the result will be an underexposed image and a histogram pushed to the left - resulting in a far from ideal image after exposure correction in post production.</p>

<p>The solution is the same as ever - trust the histogram. Trying to match the LCD to the histogram by reducing the brightness may help a little, but it will never be perfect and doing that will make it harder to see the screen in bright light anyway. </p>

[model mayhem gallery]

<p>I did the exact same thing shooting some video. I was in the shade but shooting guys playing soccer out in the sun. My LCD darkened do the the shade spot I was in, so I over exposed by 1 stop to compensate. the video looked exactly 1 stop overexposed. Since then I have learned to trust the camera's metering system. I am not a big fan of the histogram yet, I am sure as i use it more I will. However, I am very comfortable with the camera's built-in meter and knowing when I need to compensate for ceratin lighting situations.</p>