First decent outside shot using aperture priority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

I am still smiling .. since most cameras these days have 'exposure compensation' why spend time in Manual when a knob gives it to you.

---

This is now becoming quite hilarious.

But surely the 'knob' used to adjust either the speed or aperture whilst in manual to put the meter where you want it is exactly the same operation.

Some would say that adjusting one knob whilst in Manual mode to adjust exposure (to what you want) is HALF the number of separate finger operations you need to do to use and adjust the 'exposure compensation' where you have to press a BUTTON + A KNOB:D

Ted was typing at the same time...................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagecoach

This is now becoming quite hilarious.

But surely the 'knob' used to adjust either the speed or aperture whilst in manual to put the meter where you want it is exactly the same operation.

Some would say that adjusting one knob whilst in Manual mode to adjust exposure (to what you want) is HALF the number of separate finger operations you need to do to use and adjust the 'exposure compensation' where you have to press a BUTTON + A KNOB:D

Ted was typing at the same time...................

---

In general, when you want to follow the lightmeter, there is no difference between M, A S. I forget the others.

Even in M you select a shutter or aperture first and then adjust the second. M for me is used when I don't want to follow the lightmeter by example in a situation where light doesn't change a lot but the lightmeter can fluctuate a lot due to a small compo change as on a sportfield, in a concert or something like that.

In my camera, D700, I can use the shutter dialwheel for temporary change the shutterspeed when set in A. Unlike to the EV-correction this diappears when the camera is switched of or in standby.

I use mostly the A so I can set the aperture so that the lens is sharpest, mostly something like f8.

George

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george013

In general, when you want to follow the lightmeter, there is no difference between M, A S. I forget the others.

---

Fully agree

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george013

Even in M you select a shutter or aperture first and then adjust the second. M for me is used when I don't want to follow the lightmeter by example in a situation where light doesn't change a lot but the lightmeter can fluctuate a lot due to a small compo change as on a sportfield, in a concert or something like that.

---

Exactly, demonstrating there is no 'one fits all' way we use our cameras.

I know one thing for certain! I never unleashed this type of controversy when I shot with the 4200. But it has opened y eyes to the options.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBW

I know one thing for certain! I never unleashed this type of controversy when I shot with the 4200. But it has opened y eyes to the options.

---

Actually you have just re-opened this debate. It shows up every few months...

As others have said, it's all about personal choice. The one thing no one has mentioned is that shooting in Manual and doing the shutter speed / aperture / ISO matching using the light meter does one thing; it slows down the photographer, which often leads to someone taking a better shot. So shooting using manual mode can be used as a technique to better one's photography.

Let's face it, the camera's light meter is not foolproof, so understanding this and compensating, regardless how one does this is actually quite important in getting a better image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

Actually you have just re-opened this debate. It shows up every few months...

As others have said, it's all about personal choice. The one thing no one has mentioned is that shooting in Manual and doing the shutter speed / aperture / ISO matching using the light meter does one thing; it slows down the photographer, which often leads to someone taking a better shot. So shooting using manual mode can be used as a technique to better one's photography.

Let's face it, the camera's light meter is not foolproof, so understanding this and compensating, regardless how one does this is actually quite important in getting a better image.

---

Off course... For normal lighting shots where camera performs properly, it does not matter what one chooses, unless one wants to go out of the box and try something different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrinmoyvk

Off course... For normal lighting shots where camera performs properly, it does not matter what one chooses, unless one wants to go out of the box and try something different.

---

Or when your exposures are based on ambient light rather then reflective light. Then you can only use M.

George

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george013

Or when your exposures are based on ambient light rather then reflective light. Then you can only use M.

George

---

+1

But on the other hand, not that many people have incident light meters and they are generally limited to portraiture and product photography.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrinmoyvk

Off course... For normal lighting shots where camera performs properly, it does not matter what one chooses, unless one wants to go out of the box and try something different.

---

In my experience, the camera performs the way it was designed to. It is up to the photographer to recognize situations where the camera's light meter will provide an inappropriate exposure,whether shooting in manual or using an automated mode, and compensating appropriately. For the inexperienced, exposure bracketing helps, for the more experienced, they will just over-ride the light meter read, either by shooting in manual mode or using exposure compensation.

Quote:

---

As others have said, it's all about personal choice....

Let's face it, the camera's light meter is not foolproof, so understanding this and compensating, regardless how one does this is actually quite important in getting a better image.

---

Full stop.

The key is knowing how to get to the exposure you want, and that requires knowing what the meter is doing in each mode and why it might over- or underestimate exposure. HOW you compensate--when you need to--is of no consequence at all.

So going back to Brian's OP: if the image wasn't what you wanted, Brian, the thing to focus on is how you would have exposed it differently. Then you can pick any path to that different exposure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanK

that requires knowing what the meter is doing in each mode and why it might over- or underestimate exposure.

---

If you change the metering mode; spot, centre weighted, matrix, etc. I would agree with that statement.

On the other hand, if all you are doing is adjusting the exposure mode; program, aperture priority, shutter priority or manual, the meter will give you exactly the same reading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

If you change the metering mode; spot, centre weighted, matrix, etc. I would agree with that statement.

On the other hand, if all you are doing is adjusting the exposure mode; program, aperture priority, shutter priority or manual, the meter will give you exactly the same reading.

---

yes, I meant the metering mode. I should have been more explicit, particularly given that the original post was written about exposure modes.

Everybody has an incident meter if they remember how to take a reading off the back of their hand :)
I had an invercone but rarely used it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

Everybody has an incident meter if they remember how to take a reading off the back of their hand :)
I had an invercone but rarely used it.

---

If you mean metering with the camera off your hand, that's a reflective meter, not an incident meter--it is metering the light reflected from your hand. A very useful thing to do. It's like having a built-in neutral card, just one about a stop off, depending on your complexion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanK

If you mean metering with the camera off your hand, that's a reflective meter, not an incident meter--it is metering the light reflected from your hand. A very useful thing to do. It's like having a built-in neutral card, just one about a stop off, depending on your complexion.

---

Okay, how do i do this very useful trick and to what purpose?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanK

If you mean metering with the camera off your hand, that's a reflective meter, not an incident meter--it is metering the light reflected from your hand. A very useful thing to do. It's like having a built-in neutral card, just one about a stop off, depending on your complexion.

---

When knowing what you're doing you should get the same result as with an incident meter. Than switch or stay on M. I believe many sport photographers are using it when their position doesn't change to much. It gives series with a constant exposure.

George

I'm baffled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dubaiphil

I'm baffled

---

I'm :confused:

I'm trying to think of a sporting situation where this method would be preferable and why.

Quote:

---

When knowing what you're doing you should get the same result as with an incident meter. Than switch or stay on M. I believe many sport photographers are using it when their position doesn't change to much. It gives series with a constant exposure.

---

This seems to mix together shooting in manual mode and using your hand as a target for reflective metering.

I started using my hand as a target when I used to shoot with an FTb, which had only a spot meter. (I actually bought it in preference to a Nikon in part for the spot meter.) One of the situations in which I still use a spot meter is when the scene is such that I don't trust any kind of averaging or evaluative metering to get it right. If you hold your palm in the right lighting, you can spot meter off it and open up a bit, 1 stop in the case of my left palm, and have an initial reading about the same as you would get with a neutral card. Then I adjust as needed from there. I don't shoot sports, but I can imagine that there are cases where the setting would trip up an evaluative metering. Then again, you could just put the camera in manual mode, take an evaluative or averaged reading, and adjust to taste from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanK

This seems to mix together shooting in manual mode and using your hand as a target for reflective metering.

I started using my hand as a target when I used to shoot with an FTb, which had only a spot meter. (I actually bought it in preference to a Nikon in part for the spot meter.) One of the situations in which I still use a spot meter is when the scene is such that I don't trust any kind of averaging or evaluative metering to get it right. If you hold your palm in the right lighting, you can spot meter off it and open up a bit, 1 stop in the case of my left palm, and have an initial reading about the same as you would get with a neutral card. Then I adjust as needed from there. I don't shoot sports, but I can imagine that there are cases where the setting would trip up an evaluative metering. Then again, you could just put the camera in manual mode, take an evaluative or averaged reading, and adjust to taste from there.

---

It's not important where you get your settings from: a incident lightmeter, your hand or a evaluative shot. If you're happy, just fix it in manual. As long as the light conditions don't change that must be ok. Watch the histogram and correct if necessary.

The only difference between M and A or S is the lightmeter. M is just a camera with no lightmeter, just like photographers used for over a century.

@Stagecoach,

Quote:

---

I'm trying to think of a sporting situation where this method would be preferable and why.

---

Just as you have white cats and black cats in the snow, you've sportsmen with white shirts and black shirts.
Zooming in or out can give different exposures using matrix metering, you're changing the framing. Shooting in M is much more stable.

George