Am I in over my head????

[richard_colozzi1]

Hi everyone,

I'm new to MF. I own a Nikon n80...always shot in the matrix metering

mode. I bought an old Mamiya 645 about 6 mos. ago and fell in love

with MF. I recently bought a Pentax 645 (non auto focus, center

weighted meter). It came with a 35mm, 45, 75mm and a 80-160mm zoom.

I want to get away from point and shoot, but I may have bit off more

than I can chew! I shot my first roll with Fiji NPH 400 and used the

35mm to take pictures of my bright yellow house on a sunny day.

Needless to say they were grossly underexposed! I knew nothing about

exposure compensation. I have since read everything that I can get my

hands on about exposure compensation, bought a grey card, and am

slowly begining to understand some of the basics. My question is this:

(and I have looked for answers to this question...with no success)

Will I have to use exposure compensation on every exposure that I

take? I understand that with the 35mm and probably with the 45mm I

will need to open up a stop or two. But with so much light coming

into the lens how can I determine how much to compensate. I realize

that I need to experiment, but is there a rule of thumb that anyone

can give me as a starting point so I don't end just wasting film? (I

do take notes on all my exposures) Unless I encounter highly unusual

lighting conditions, will I be able to use the 75mm and 80-160mm

without worrying about E/V compensation? I am actually thinking about

buying the new 645Nii...but do I really want to spend $1500 for a new

body..or would I be better off just buying a spot meter and learn how

to use it in conjunction with my P645. I don't mind the manual focus.

The mirror damping seems fine. I put a small container of water on

top of the camera and fired the camera....the water barely moved. So

I'm happy with the camera....I've read in some posts that center

weighted metering is one of the metering options put in cameras just

for the "good old boys" who learned their trade when that was the

only metering available....but now it is obsolete and no one really

uses it anymore. Any thoughts on that? Sorry for my lenghtly tirade.

There must be some out there who can offer me some guidance and

comfort!

Thanks in advance for your time!

 

Ricrac47

[stephen hazelton]

With center weighted metering, you shouldn't be "grossly" underexposed unless you're shooting into the sun or something really odd like that. You might note that there have been a couple of threads recently where people were comparing center weighted metering to matrix metering with 35mm and couldn't tell that there was a difference. You may have a meter that is off, or some other mechanical problem. Try metering with your 35mm, and see how the reading compares to the Pentax. On the house, you can move in till it fills the whole screen, and meter it that way- then maybe open up a bit if it's a light color. But it sounds like you have some problem other than just exposure compensation going on.

[stephen hazelton]

I might point out that if you walk up close to your subject and meter it, you should get the same reading you do with spotmeter from a distance- so get the metering problems worked out before you get the spotmeter.

[richard_cochran]

If you want the average thing your meter sees to come out

about mid-toned, don't apply any compensation. If you want

the average thing your meter sees to come out brighter than

mid-toned, apply plus compensation. If you want the average

thing your meter sees to come out darker than mid-toned, apply

minus compensation.

<p>

That's really all there is to it.

<p>

In fact, you can often forget about the second two

cases and just remember the first sentence. Point your meter

at something you want to come out mid-toned, and apply

no compensation. If you can't find anything naturally in your scene

that you want to look mid-toned, carry a grey card around

and meter off of it. Or split the meter's field of view

between something a bit darker and something a bit lighter

than mid-toned.

<p>

That rule applies regardless of focal length.

<p>

As for center weighted metering, it's not perfect, but it

<em>is</em> perfectly predictable. You can absolutely trust

that it will give you the correct meter reading when pointed

at something you want to come out mid-toned, and it will

give you a reading too high when you point it at something

you want to come out dark, and too low when you point it at

something you want to come out light.

<p>

Matrix is much more

complex to "second guess". Either type works well in most situations,

Matrix works better in the hands of a monkey who

doesn't understand it but follows it blindly, while centerweighted

fails more predictably and is therefore much easier to understand

how, when, and why to compensate.

[elliot_n]

- You will find a cheap incident light meter (e.g Sekonic L308) much more convenient

than a gray card.

 

- The focal length of your lens (35mm, 45mm, 75mm etc) isn't really relevant to

exposure. You will certainly be making a mistake if you give + exposure

compensation everytime you use the 35mm or 45mm lenses.

 

- Negative film can take a lot more overexposure than underexposure. So for the

time being, whilst you're getting used to your camera, rate NPH at 200ASA. This will

give you some leeway.

 

(I always use an incident meter with my Mamiya 645AF, and rate all negative films at

half their stated ASA speed)

[conrad_hoffman]

Either something's wrong, or you're thinking too much. Your exposures should be very close to the "sunny 16" rule if you're shooting under sunny conditions. If this isn't what your meter gives you, then it's time for a service. Personally I like a bit more exposure and use the "sunny 11" rule :-) I second the idea of getting an inexpensive incident meter, or possibly an expodisk (sp? do a Google search).

[bong]

You've got some good responses here, Richard. I'll give my vote for an incident meter as well. It's easy to use and you won't have to worry about adding or reducing exposure for most situations.

 

On the other hand, you may not find any improvement with your exposures even if you got a spotmeter. In fact, you may even get worse results. Having said that, Ansel Adams' Zone System provides a very good explanation of exposure. While I highly recommend investigating the Zone System, it's often too much information for the needs of most photographers. In your case, it may suffice to put a roll of slide film in your N80, use the spot metering mode and find a subject with a relatively wide range of tones (from light to dark) then take a series of bracketed exposures where you take a reading from some part of the scene for each series. For example, measure a highlight and expose at th meter reading, +1.5 stops and -1.5 stops. Keep notes. When you get your roll back, recall where you took the meter reading from and how much compensation you had, if any, for the well exposed frames. When you use your Pentax, you'll have to adjust for the bigger metering area but the lesson you've learned still applies.

 

Good light!

[roger krueger]

Just remember that the meter is trying for a midtone. If you're pointing it at something bright, it'll make that a midtone--and everything else mud. Light sources, like the sun, or a streetlight, can cause really gross underexposure.

 

Matrix metering is the camera trying to "think" its way around this by looking at a bunch of different spots separately, and trying to fit them all within slide film lattitude.

 

Center-weighted averages the whole frame, but gives more importance to the central area. Not as accurate as matrix, BUT still used becuase it's predictably inaccurate--with practice you can look at a scene and tell how center-weighted is going to screw it up, and compensate accordingly. Trying to outguess matrix will make your head explode.

 

Spot meters are an exotic discipline all their own. If you're doing Zone system, trying to put your highlights at precisely one level and your shadows at precisely another level, they're the only game in town.

 

But for the vast majority of uses, a handheld incident meter is a lot easier to use, and less prone to error. It'll beat the pants off even the fanciest in-camera metering, because you're measuring how much light there is, not how much light is bouncing off a given subject. For a VERY educational experience, meter incidient and compare it to what the camera says. When they're different try to figure out why.

 

Finally, a lot of people rate NPH at 320 or even 200. It costs you a tiny bit of sharpness, but gives you less grain and snappier color.

 

Oh, and for long posts, try using double returns to break it into paragraphs; it makes it more readable. The Photo.net software strips out single returns, but keeps doubles.

[richard_colozzi1]

Everybody,

Thanks for your thoughful responses. This is really great! You have all given me lots of information to digest. (and to attempt)

 

I have been a "monkey" up until now....I gues the question is: Can you teach an old monkey new tricks?? I hope so.

 

My comment on a the incident meter is this. I like to do landscapes, cityscapes, etc. I always thought that one had to be where the subject was and point the meter at the camera...which would be impossible with many of the photograps that I like to take. Is there a ways around this?

 

Also I noticed that no one suggested that I made a mistake buying this camera, which makes me feel good! Many of my exposures under relatively normal lighting conditions have come out fine. I think that the light yellow house totally frontlit by the sun was the problem.

 

I will try rating the film to 200.....I never even thought of that.

Sometimes when one is thinking too hard, the easiest answer is overlooked!

[r s]

Even though you are shooting a valley that is a mile away using the lightmeter where you are and simply holding it up in the air and get the exposure readings will still work.

 

It will be the same light falling on you here as it is over there.

Now...should the valley have..hmm...a huge ballpark with lots of floodlights then you would have to compensate for that...

 

Would the valley be thrown into deep shadows and you want to focus on that...you may have to compensate for that...

 

Here is where bracketing and practise comes in.

 

Enjoy your fine camera!

[roger krueger]

<<Can you teach an old monkey new tricks??>>

 

It's like AA--you can be a recovering monkey, but never an ex-monkey.

 

I've been shooting MF for a half-dozen years now, and at least once a month I screw something up so badly it makes me want to jump up and down on my bananas and fling poo at bystanders!

[richard_colozzi1]

Speaking of bananas......and other vegitation: Is green grass, medium grey in shade and/or sun??? It's all so confusing!!!!

[bong]

>> Is green grass, medium grey in shade and/or sun???

 

Both. If everything is in the shade then you can read the grass as your midtone (middle gray). If everything is in the sun then you can read the grass as your midtone. If half the scene is in the shade and the other half in the sun then I would:

 

1. Take a reading off the grass in the shade. Call this exposure level A.

 

2. Take a reading off the grass in the sun. Call this exposure level B.

 

3. Compute how many stops there are between A and B, inclusive. For example, if the meter indicates 1/125 at f/5.6 for the grass in shade and 1/125 at f/11 for grass in the sun then there is a 2 stop difference between A and B.

 

4. If I get a one stop difference between A and B then I will choose the grass in sun reading (B). The scene in the shade will have one stop less exposure. In Zone speak, I am placing grass in the sun in Zone V and grass in the shade in Zone IV. With black and white film I will use normal development (determined by previous testing).

 

5. If the difference is more than 1 stop then I will still place the grass in the shade in Zone IV (exposure A less one stop). However, the grass in the sun will end up in Zone V or higher. I can't do anything about this at exposure time. If I develop the (black and white) film normally then the grass in sun will be too dense (its portion on the negative will be darker). Therefore, I will reduce my development time (pull development) so that the grass in sun will not develop as much and hence be less dense. I do this so that when I print the negative, the grass in shade will print at Zone IV and the grass in sun will print somewhere near Zone V without any burning or dodging. Previous testing will have given me an idea of how much to reduce development based on the difference between the grass in shade and grass in sun readings.

 

The fly in this particular ointment is that if you are using color negative or slide film then you can't decrease or increase development time to make the highlights less or more dense, respectively. For color negative film, I would just place the grass in Zone IV (or whatever zone your experiments show as good grass in shade) and hope that the printers can work their magic to show the grass in the sun as normally exposed grass in the sun. Reverse the rules for color slides because highlights are _less_ dense than shadows. You will therefore want to expose the grass in the sun correctly and hope that the grass in the shade does not turn out too dark.

 

Isn't this fun? ;)

 

--bong

[richard_colozzi1]

Hey Bong,

Two questions: I obviously need a spot meter to do this?

And, if there is a 2 stop differance between exposure A and exposure B why can't I just split the differance and adjust 1 f-stop...wouldn't that average out the two readings?

[lex_jenkins]

Stop putting containers of water on your camera. Not only is that worryingly obsessive behavior, everyone knows the correct liquid is beer.

[richard_colozzi1]

Hey Lex,

I did obsess a bit on on using water verses beer.....however in the end I determined that the specific gravity of beer being somewhat greater than water would not provide me with an adequate indicator of camera movement for my shutter test!

 

Actually on a more serious note, I was greatly impressed by the apparent lack of camera movement. I was not even using a particularly

sturdy tripod

[bong]

>> Hey Bong, Two questions: I obviously need a spot meter to do this?<br>

>> And, if there is a 2 stop differance between exposure A and<br>

>> exposure B why can't I just split the differance and adjust<br>

>> 1 f-stop...wouldn't that average out the two readings?

<p>

No, you don't need a spotmeter. Your center weighted meter should work fine as long as you can get close enough for your metering target to completely cover the metering area. I do have to admit, though, that spotmeters can be quite convenient at times. If you'd like to explore this topic further, I highly recommend Carson Graves' <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0240802039/qid=1055643899/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-2821984-5645436?v=glance&s=books">The Zone System for 35mm Photographers: A Basic Guid to Exposure Control</a>.

<p>

You can average exposures A and B. If there is a two stop difference between them then the subject you took a meter reading from for exposure A (grass in shade) will end in Zone IV and the subject for exposure B (grass in sun) will end in Zone VI. If bright grass in the sun looks good then that's the right exposure. However, as the difference between exposures A and B increases the average will push the subjects for A and B further into the shadow and highlight, respectively. Things get technically interesting as you near the limits of your film's tonal range. It's easy to give in to your curiosity at this point and start playing with films and developers instead of making photographs especially when you start processing your own black and white films. It is great fun, though.

<p>

Shoot slides if you want to see what happens with your exposure choices. Color negatives are pretty forgiving with exposure errors and prints will mask any exposure variations even more. Slides, on the other hand, will show a half-stop change in exposure. Enjoy!

[james_mullineaux]

This is pretty much all gleaned from Canon FD use (which also uses a center-weighted averaging meter), but I do shoot MF at times :) My understanding is that color negative film tolerates 3-5 stops of overexposure while only tolerating 1-2 stops of underexposure thus I always overexpose by 1-2 thirds of a stop ATLEAST. If a subject is backlit I'll overexpose by up to 2 stops. I do this on my Canon A-1 through an exposure comensation dial but on my Kiev 60 (stop groaning) I just rate 400 film at 320 and 100 film at 64 but develope it normally. Maybe this is sloppy but it works more often than not.<br><br>

As for metering I like my A-1's center-weighted meter, it's done well for me. My Kiev 60's meter is so shot I meter everything with a Norwood Director hand held jobby that I scooped on ebay for $15. It works great for landscapes as well as potraits and still lifes and it's 50 years old!<br><br>

Here's a couple of manually metered MF shots:<br>

<a href="http://www.jmxphoto.com/random/Rail_Bridge.shtml">Rail Bridge</a><br>

<a href="http://www.jmxphoto.com/random/old_headstones.shtml">Old Headstones</a><br>

<a href="http://www.jmxphoto.com/random/Baltimore_Statue.shtml">Baltimore Statue</a><br><br>

And here's a shot overexposed by 1/3 stop taken with my A-1:<br>

<a href="http://www.jmxphoto.com/random/Aqua_Hotel.shtml">Aqua Hotel</a><br><br>Hope this helped!

[alberto pastorelli]

Hello Richard !

 

1) "Will I have to use exposure compensation on every exposure that I take? "

No ! Only when the circumstances required it. For example, when you can't go more near (to fill up) to meter the part of the image you want.

 

2) "I understand that with the 35mm and probably with the 45mm I will need to open up a stop or two "

This is not a rule. If the background has a difference of one stop or two and the subject you need is little or not centered you can do it, but, remember, this doesn't mean "always"

 

By the way, with color negative (and more with a 400 iso like NPH) you have an exposure latitude wide more than 2 stops...

 

3) "am actually thinking about buying the new 645Nii...but do I really want to spend $1500 for a new body..or would I be better off just buying a spot meter and learn how to use it in conjunction with my P645 "

The 645n is a wonderful camera, but the only changes (in metering) from the manual 645 is the capability to meter in a "matrix" mode.

 

4) "I've read in some posts that center weighted metering is one of the metering options put in cameras just for the "good old boys" who learned their trade when that was the only metering available....but now it is obsolete and no one really uses it anymore. Any thoughts on that? "

I really think this is a kind of nonsense observation. There are situations in which you have no time to measure in multiple spot to build an average or center weighted, and the matrix system is in error... It doesn't exist an "obsolete" way to measure the light, on the contrary is the subject that requires a different method to approach.

kind regards