Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 22, 2003, 4:36 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 229
Default Digital Rebel - Exposure

For anyone who has purchased a Digital Rebel. I have noticed that it needs at least +1 exposure compensation otherwise pictures are somewhat underexposed. Exposure seems okay using Flash 420 EX. on "P" settinmg at ISO 100.

My outdoor shots do not match examples in Steve's without adding +1.

Has any experienced this problem?
Ctrack is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 26, 2003, 8:02 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3
Default

I noticed the same thing. I've been playing around with it for over a week and can't seem to get the proper exposure when using the creative zone. Even the basic zone settings sometime produce underexposed photos.
bruchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2003, 9:08 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Are you sure it is not your monitor? Did you try a print or did you look print or look at histogram graph?
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2003, 6:18 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Posting a picture... can give a lot of leads from other readers. Right now all comments are just a shot in the dark! My guess is contrary to Steve's examples your subjects/scenes had a lot more highlights (ie brighter details)

An image along with the EXIF can tell a lot about the exposure beside erring on the underexposure is better than an overexposure which can clip out the white...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 12:09 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3
Default

These two photos are underexposed... shot in Landscape mode. The skies were clear but the photos are dark.

(Hi bandwidth, 1.2MB)
http://www.geocities.com/bruchen_03/images/IMG_0374.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/bruchen_03/images/IMG_0375.jpg

Low-bandwidth, 35KB)
http://www.geocities.com/bruchen_03/.../IMG_0374a.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/bruchen_03/.../IMG_0375a.jpg

Exif for both:

File Name
IMG_0374.jpg
Camera Model Name
Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Shooting Date/Time
9/21/2003 2:25:43 PM
Shooting Mode
Landscape
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/160
Av( Aperture Value )
8.0
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
100
Lens
18.0 - 55.0mm
Focal Length
18.0mm
Image Size
2048x1360
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Auto
Parameters
Contrast +1
Sharpness +1
Color saturation +1
Color tone Normal
Color Space
sRGB
File Size
1254KB
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting
Owner's Name
Camera Body No.
0460029816

Pls let me know what you can make out of these info and the photos.
bruchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 6:02 AM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Just what I thought... great expanse of sky and full sun! The camera is spot on, but can be fooled by the hightlights and the wide exposure latitude of the sun, this no different than shooting at the beach.

You have to use the spot-metering or exposure compensation. The camera metering average the scene lighting but is not sophisticated enough to know to put more weight on the smaller darker area (and overexposed the sky)! Reflections from the water did not help the matter either...

Any camera would have had the same problem, although a polarizer might have help (ie darken the sky and rid of the reflection)... waiting for an overhead cloud to block the sun might be another option! :lol:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 7:00 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Like what NHL said, this is excatly what any camera would do if you point it near or full at the sun (with certain zoom length it can even be unhealthy to look through the viewfinder at the sun). Did you help the camera with a sun hood / hand newspaper ?

I'm not sure which metering mode is used in landscape mode, but you might want to experiment with pointing the centre of camera at desired subject in scene, halfpress shutter, reframe and snap.
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 10:00 AM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Also you're at the full 18 wide (28mm), zooming in would have cropped out the bright sky and would have help the metering (and also locked it in with the * button) as well before recomposing the shots...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 12:08 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

I don't agree on the spotmetering. Spotmetering is much to difficult to use for at shot like this. An experienced landscape photographer would never use spot for a shot like this. Neither should you. As far as I can see your shot's are a bit underexposed as you state.

You have to "think" photography as NHL is saying between his lines. If you shoot a dominating sky like that, your experience must tell you that you have to correct the exposure value until you achieve a satisfying result. This is where a LCD view comes in handy. Use it.

The great thing about digicams underexposure (and it is great, believe me) is that you can correct this by your PC very easily. You can not do this with burned out highlights. I always shoot with -0.3 --> 1.0 on my Nikon. This way I can correct everything I need in my digital darkroom. Just as photographers has done for many years.

A complex scenery will challenge your skills. The ultimate digicam is not available. This is one of the wonderful things about photographing - we have to use our brains too...it's not just a push on a button!

(I hope I didn't sound too arrogant :lol: )

BTW you have a severe light fall-off in the corners ! Kind of vignets.
Are you aware of this problem ? If the lens gives you the same results without filterattatchment, you should consider returning the lens. Otherwise it could be a lens-problem due to it's cost!
Original

Corrected.
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 1:05 PM   #10
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

You're thinking about 1 spot... I'm thinking of multiples and 'lock-in' the optimum one which is easy with the *. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Nice correction BTW which is why I said earlier that it's better to err on the underexposure!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:59 AM.