Re: Exposure compensation

On 26/1/17, Eric Weir, discombobulated, unleashed: >While I'm At It. You just made that up ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production -- _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.n

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 1:52 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote: > > On 26/1/17, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed: > >> What I ask is? > > GSH > > (Good Spot Hippy) Nope. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 12:37 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > On January 26, 2017 9:15:53 AM PST, Steve Cottrell wrote: >> On 26/1/17, Eric Weir, discombobulated, unleashed: >> >>> WIAI, a question for you and Godfrey: What's "chimping"? Taking a >> shot, >>> checking the results, adjusting and takin

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 12:15 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote: > > On 26/1/17, Eric Weir, discombobulated, unleashed: > >> WIAI, a question for you and Godfrey: What's "chimping"? Taking a shot, >> checking the results, adjusting and taking it again? > > I've seen lots of internet acronyms but not that

Re: Exposure compensation

On 26/1/17, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed: >What I ask is? GSH (Good Spot Hippy) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production -- _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/

Re: Exposure compensation

What I ask is? On January 26, 2017 9:15:53 AM PST, Steve Cottrell wrote: >On 26/1/17, Eric Weir, discombobulated, unleashed: > >>WIAI, a question for you and Godfrey: What's "chimping"? Taking a >shot, >>checking the results, adjusting and taking it again? Yes, people looking at the display and

Re: Exposure compensation

On 26/1/17, Eric Weir, discombobulated, unleashed: >WIAI, a question for you and Godfrey: What's "chimping"? Taking a shot, >checking the results, adjusting and taking it again? I've seen lots of internet acronyms but not that one. h!! -- Cheers,

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Larry Colen wrote: > > Yup, theory and practice. In practice, Lightroom is only good for > compensating by a few stops. With the K100 and K20, when shooting in low > light I was ruled by the histogram, with the K-5,3,1 it guides me. I know > that I can give a

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > It's not the ability to focus you lose, it's the ability to easily check > focus on the camera LCD or EVF in the field—the image display of a several > stops underexposed JPEG is too difficult to see fine detail in most of the > time

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 11:29 AM, Gonz wrote: > > Not quite accurate, but close. There is still an amplifier there. > Just multiplying the digital values you get will result in > posterization at the shadow end, its math. You can't create > information out of nothing. If you only have 2 bits of

Re: Exposure compensation

Gonz wrote: Not quite accurate, but close. There is still an amplifier there. Just multiplying the digital values you get will result in posterization at the shadow end, its math. You can't create information out of nothing. If you only have 2 bits of information (4 values), then the digitiza

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 7:43 AM, Eric Weir wrote: > > Thanks, Godfrey. I notice the disadvantage you mention in the other > post—possibly losing ability to focus accurately. Can autofocus be trusted in > such situations? It's not the ability to focus you lose, it's the ability to easily check fo

Re: Exposure compensation

Not quite accurate, but close. There is still an amplifier there. Just multiplying the digital values you get will result in posterization at the shadow end, its math. You can't create information out of nothing. If you only have 2 bits of information (4 values), then the digitization can only re

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > >> Thanks, Mark. That helps. >> >> It also raises something else I’ve been wondering about. Can I set ISO to a >> low value, use whatever aperture and shutting settings I want for depth of >> field and capturing motion, not bother abou

Re: Exposure compensation

> Thanks, Mark. That helps. > > It also raises something else I’ve been wondering about. Can I set ISO to a > low value, use whatever aperture and shutting settings I want for depth of > field and capturing motion, not bother about underexposure, adjust exposure > in post processing, and retain

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 7:19 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: > > Eric Weir wrote: > >> There are things that were said, though, that I did not hear. That is, >> didn’t understand. >> And probably am not going to understand when you explain it to me. What’s an >> “ISO invariant” camera? > > In the ear

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 10:19 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: > > In the early days of digital it was standard practice to apply some > amplification to the signal from the sensor prior to analog-to-digital > conversion. This was how one increased the ISO setting. It's still > used in some sensors today b

Re: Exposure compensation

Eric Weir wrote: >There are things that were said, though, that I did not hear. That is, didn’t >understand. >And probably am not going to understand when you explain it to me. What’s an >“ISO invariant” camera? In the early days of digital it was standard practice to apply some amplification

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 8:15 AM, Eric Weir wrote: > > Pos That shoulda been “Zos”. (And now I see that spell-check did it.) -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net “...we are a form of invitation

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 25, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > > If you're in Program mode, the exposure compensation adjustment (the > +/- button + the rear dial on the K-5) moves the exposure the desired > number of stops up or down the program line; i.e. generally adjusts > both s

Re: Exposure compensation

> On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:07 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: > > I never bother thinking about ETTR at all, ever. I just adjust > the exposure in post if I see fit. I’m glad to hear this. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA U

Re: Exposure compensation

Eric, here's a concrete answer from my concrete little brain: If you're in Program mode, the exposure compensation adjustment (the +/- button + the rear dial on the K-5) moves the exposure the desired number of stops up or down the program line; i.e. generally adjusts both shutter an

Re: Exposure compensation: don't optimize for the wrong thing

Ken Waller wrote: I've found on my K-3, K20d and K10, in some cases, the individual channels - R, G, B need to be reviewed separately on the in camera histogram to prevent blow out of details in that specific channel, especially R. Exactly. I learned that early on when photographing flowers.

Re: Exposure compensation

it have to adjust one of those? Then what's with a separate function? If you use your camera on fully manual settings (ISO, iris, shutter speed) then exposure compensation is not relevant. If you are using an automatic setting (eg program, aperture value, shutter value) then the suggested

Re: Exposure compensation

ginal Message - From: "P. J. Alling" Subject: Re: Exposure compensation On Pentax cameras, at least, the histogram is being generated from the embedded, or generated, in the case of live view, jpeg. So you can afford and might even want some clipping of highlights if you'r

Re: Exposure compensation

On Pentax cameras, at least, the histogram is being generated from the embedded, or generated, in the case of live view, jpeg. So you can afford and might even want some clipping of highlights if you're shooting raw. How much would depend on the jpeg camera settings since those directly effect

Re: Exposure compensation

separate function? > > If you use your camera on fully manual settings (ISO, iris, shutter > speed) then exposure compensation is not relevant. > > If you are using an automatic setting (eg program, aperture value, > shutter value) then the suggested exposure by the camera may

Re: Exposure compensation

On 1/24/2017 3:31 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Bruce Walker wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Larry Colen wrote: Also, there are different exposure methodologies. [...] If you're shooting raw, then you generally want to "expose to the right", in order to preserve the highlights, Come aga

Re: Exposure compensation

Steve Cottrell wrote: On 24/1/17, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed: Also, there are different exposure methodologies. If you are shooting to JPEG, then you want to expose for the final image, and if you lose all detail in the highlights or the shadows, well there's only so much you ca

Re: Exposure compensation

On 24/1/17, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed: >Also, there are different exposure methodologies. If you are shooting >to JPEG, then you want to expose for the final image, and if you lose >all detail in the highlights or the shadows, well there's only so much >you can fit into 8 bits.

Re: Exposure compensation

Bruce Walker wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Larry Colen wrote: Also, there are different exposure methodologies. [...] If you're shooting raw, then you generally want to "expose to the right", in order to preserve the highlights, Come again? ETTR actually endangers highlights. It

Re: Exposure compensation

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Larry Colen wrote: > > Also, there are different exposure methodologies. [...] > If you're shooting raw, then you generally want to "expose > to the right", in order to preserve the highlights, Come again? ETTR actually endangers highlights. It's the shadows tha

Re: Exposure compensation

use your camera on fully manual settings (ISO, iris, shutter speed) then exposure compensation is not relevant. If you are using an automatic setting (eg program, aperture value, shutter value) then the suggested exposure by the camera may not appeal to you. Hence you can adjust the camera's

Re: Exposure compensation

on fully manual settings (ISO, iris, shutter speed) then exposure compensation is not relevant. If you are using an automatic setting (eg program, aperture value, shutter value) then the suggested exposure by the camera may not appeal to you. Hence you can adjust the camera's 'thoug

Re: Exposure compensation

Exposure compensation effects everything while it's on. So if you're getting consistently over or under exposed shots using the cameras suggested settings or if you're in one of the automatic modes, you can dial in the compensation. I've noticed that the K-5II and K20D

Exposure compensation

I’ve been puzzled by this. How does it work? There are only three variables—sensitivity, aperture, shutter speed. Doesn’t it have to adjust one of those? Then what’s with a separate function? -- Eric Weir De

Re: ME-Super exposure compensation ring

Juan Buhler wrote: > I posted this last week, but it never made it to the list it seems. > Let's try again... > > Question for the ME-Super experts here: I received the body I got on > ebay, and it looks and sounds great. The only thing is, the exposure > compensation ri

Re: ME-Super exposure compensation ring

On 9/7/06, Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's what I remembered from my old ME-Super. So it looks like this > one is just very hard to turn, I guess. Might be worth removing the knob and cleaning under it. It's probably coagulated oil/dirt/coffee/cola/etc. underneath the knob itself t

Re: ME-Super exposure compensation ring

t; else to do. > > Dave > > > > > Juan Buhler wrote: > > I posted this last week, but it never made it to the list it seems. > > Let's try again... > > > > Question for the ME-Super experts here: I received the body I got on > > ebay, and it looks and s

Re: ME-Super exposure compensation ring

on > ebay, and it looks and sounds great. The only thing is, the exposure > compensation ring is extremely hard to move. It was on x1/4, and with > a lot of effort and a paper clip as leverage I could bring it back to > x1. > > Am I missing something in the way it moves? The ASA se

ME-Super exposure compensation ring

I posted this last week, but it never made it to the list it seems. Let's try again... Question for the ME-Super experts here: I received the body I got on ebay, and it looks and sounds great. The only thing is, the exposure compensation ring is extremely hard to move. It was on x1/4, and w

RE: Flash exposure compensation

: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 10:35 PM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Flash exposure compensation > > > I'm starting to understand when to use exposure compensation > in normal light conditions but flash compensation baffles me. > > Under what conditions are you

Flash exposure compensation

I'm starting to understand when to use exposure compensation in normal light conditions but flash compensation baffles me. Under what conditions are you supposed to use it and how much? Are there any rules of thumb here? I'll be grateful for any answers or references. Gautam

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

IL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:19 AM Subject: Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey) > Interesting - you're saying that the shutter speeds are only *shown* > quantised, in the viewfinder (and other) displays? If so, does the same &

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Steve Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mark Roberts wrote: >> And *any* electronically-controlled shutter offers stepless speeds when >> in autoexposure mode :) > >Interesting - you're saying that the shutter speeds are only *shown* >quantised, in the viewfinder (and other) displays? Yes. >I

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Mark Roberts wrote: And *any* electronically-controlled shutter offers stepless speeds when in autoexposure mode :) Interesting - you're saying that the shutter speeds are only *shown* quantised, in the viewfinder (and other) displays? If so, does the same principle apply to automatically-contro

Re: Mechanical Camera Shutter Cams - was MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mark Roberts wrote: > >> In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a >> *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give >> "in-between" shutter speeds simply by setting it between the settings on >> the shutter sp

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Steve Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mark Roberts wrote: >> In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a >> *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give >> "in-between" shutter speeds simply by setting it between the settings on >> the shutter speed d

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Mark Roberts wrote: In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give "in-between" shutter speeds simply by setting it between the settings on the shutter speed dial. I assume you're only talking about cameras with

Re: Mechanical Camera Shutter Cams - was MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Can you give us a list of the cameras you're aware of? And is this true for the slow speeds as well? Mark Roberts wrote: In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give "in-between" shutter speeds simply by settin

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

I'm pretty sure K bodies can do this, too. I once tested a KM, firing at a white wall using flash, from 1/60th to 1/1000, including guestimated half-stops. The shutter progressed smoothly in the sequenced photos, ie the guestimate 1/90 showed a little less shutter than 1/125, etc. I don't know if

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

True for the MX as well, except the speed between 1/30s & 1/60s. But then again, the mechanical shutter is not that accurate there might not be any practical meaning to do so. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single*

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Thanks for the info. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 4:00 PM Subject: Re: MZ-S exposure

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >"Raimo K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Is this true for K 1000? > >Yes. > >>Not all mechanical shutters can do this because the speeds are controlled by >>cams, different one for each speed. > >In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is con

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

"Raimo K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Is this true for K 1000? Yes. >Not all mechanical shutters can do this because the speeds are controlled by >cams, different one for each speed. In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single* cam. Having a continuous surf

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

- Original Message - From: "Raimo K" Subject: Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey) Is this true for K 1000? Not all mechanical shutters can do this because the speeds are controlled by cams, different one for each speed. The only one I

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

, 2004 1:41 AM Subject: Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey) > Henri Toivonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Even with mechanical cameras like the K1000 you could get "in-between" > shutter speeds by balancing the shutter speed dial between

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Henri Toivonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Tom Reese wrote: > >>Patrick asked: >> >>"Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how >>do you you do it ?" >> >>You can get precise exposure adjustments by adjusting the ISO speed. For >>example, to give it just a little m

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Tom Reese wrote: Patrick asked: "Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how do you you do it ?" You can get precise exposure adjustments by adjusting the ISO speed. For example, to give it just a little more light, adjust the ISO to 90 for ISO 100 slide film. Settin

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Patrick asked: "Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how do you you do it ?" You can get precise exposure adjustments by adjusting the ISO speed. For example, to give it just a little more light, adjust the ISO to 90 for ISO 100 slide film. Setting it to ISO 110

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Paal, Any more such tips ? keep em coming :-) Patrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patrick wrote: Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how do you you do it ? REPLY: Put the exposure compensation dial about two thirds between the 0 value and the 0,5 value; in

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

You're kidding right! I thought I knew the MZ-S.. Cool Tip :-) Patrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patrick wrote: Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how do you you do it ? REPLY: Put the exposure compensation dial about two thirds between the 0 val

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Pål Jensen wrote: Patrick wrote: Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how do you you do it ? REPLY: Put the exposure compensation dial about two thirds between the 0 value and the 0,5 value; in other words between the click stops. Incidentally, this method

MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)

Patrick wrote: Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how do you you do it ? REPLY: Put the exposure compensation dial about two thirds between the 0 value and the 0,5 value; in other words between the click stops. Pål

Re: Flash exposure compensation with the MZ-S and FTZ flash...

Nick, Basically it would work just like the ZX-5n. You set the exposure manually and then override the exposure compensation. The flash works off this. So it would work with any TTL flash with the MZ-S. The one nice thing about the MZ-S is that with a minor flick of the thumb you can change

Flash exposure compensation with the MZ-S and FTZ flash...

I'm sorry for repeating a query I'm sure has been discussed to death, but I do not seem to remember the issue being resolved and I cannot find an appropriate post in the archives. Anyway, was it determined if you can set flash exposure compensation using the MZ-S' regular exposure

Metz / Pentax 360FTZ flash exposure compensation

Hi all! The newest Pentax flash , the 360FTZ, is supposed to have exposure compensation ON THE FLASH, not via the body, if I remember the info here well. Anybody knows if this flash's feature would work on older bodies as well? And even bodies without builtin flash exposure compens

Vs: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

TED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 31. heinäkuuta 2001 20:53 Aihe: Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation >In my opinion, the ZX-5n also tends to overexpose with negative film while >in matrix mode, but I find it easier to increase the ISO rating t

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

In my opinion, the ZX-5n also tends to overexpose with negative film while in matrix mode, but I find it easier to increase the ISO rating than to attempt to compensate for every shot Bill, KG4LOV [EMAIL PROTECTED] > When I use the MZ-5 with slide film, I use centre weighted or spot > metering,

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Isn't it terrible, you still have to know what you are doing to get the best out of even the latest style automation? Metering systems are not magic, even the fanciest multi-segment system still biases for best overall exposure. If you want to move the exposure up or down the curve you have to do

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Pål wrote: PJ> Thats seem pretty starnge to me. I have no experience with the PJ> MZ-5n but my experience with multi pattern metering is that it can PJ> be considered "right" close to 90% of the time. A 50% failure rate PJ> seem to be about right for centerweighted metering. A typical situatio

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

My girlfriend has an MZ50 and it more often than not over exposes her shots. - Original Message - From: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 11:00 AM Subject: Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

osure is rarely off. Joe > I use exposure compensation with my MZ-7 pretty often. I must say I don't > like matrix metering at all, but have no choice except for mounting my SMC M > 50/f2 on, which turns my matrix into center-weighted metering. But since > it's true that one n

Re: Re[2]: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

on the results. In my old Spotamtic days, my success rate approached 100% because I knew the material. Bob Rapp - Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 6:58 AM Subject: Re: Re[2]: Multi-segment

Re: Re[2]: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Alin wrote: > Definitely contrary to my experience. More than half of my slides > exposed with multisegment were totally compromised by overexposure. Thats seem pretty starnge to me. I have no experience with the MZ-5n but my experience with multi pattern metering is that it can be conside

Re:: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Alin wrote: >Multisegment metering works great as long as you recognize it's a >scene for it. Exactly. And thats the point with any kind of meter. Its also no big deal finding out which way you need to compensate. It works like any other meter trying to render everything mid toned.

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

-- >From: tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation >Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001, 10:55 AM >> In fact, I will be >> the first to admit that my best photos (no exceptions) were taken using the

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Nicholas Wright wrote: > > > > >> The thing > >> that I always wonder is "If manual camera users can through experimentation > >> learn what their cameras are doing (meter wise) why cannot auto camera users > >> do the same thing?" Well we can and we do... > > > > Except in this case the experime

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

ifficult to judge when it will fail > and in which "direction." Hence, it is not advisable to use > exposure compensation together with multi-segment metering." > > So, would you use exposure compensation only in spot meter mode? > What do you think? How much do you t

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

NSW. 2052 Australia >From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 18:57:42 -0400 > >You know, I'd heard so many horror stories about

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

-- >From: tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation >Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001, 6:59 PM > > Nicholas Wright wrote: >> >> I strongly agree with Pal on this one... this also harkens bac

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Last winter I went shooting lighthouses in the ice with a guy who was packing a Nikon F-5. We're talking black steel catwalk, red lighthouse, gray sky, white snow and ice. I shot the Pz-1p in centerweighted mode with +0.7 stops of exposure compensation, based on a couple of spot

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

You know, I'd heard so many horror stories about matrix metering that I'd never used it until last weekend. Then I found myself needing to get a lot of photos in a short time in difficult lighting conditions: many subjects in shaded areas with lots of bright backgrounds and all kinds of variations

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

- >From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation >Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001, 1:21 PM > > Hernan wrote: > >> I just read this at Boris's site >> (http://www.bdim

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

Hi, I use exposure compensation with my MZ-7 pretty often. I must say I don't like matrix metering at all, but have no choice except for mounting my SMC M 50/f2 on, which turns my matrix into center-weighted metering. But since it's true that one never knows, what the matrix is exactl

Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation

tion." Hence, it is not advisable to use exposure compensation > together with multi-segment metering." > > So, would you use exposure compensation only in spot meter mode? What do you > think? How much do you trust multi-segment metering? With all due respect, I wouldn

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:57:40 +1000, you wrote: >A real pro could once shoot Kodalith (can you still buy that stuff?) at ISO >2 or 3 with a latitude of one poofteenth of a stop on an old view camera >with a lens having NO detents on its aperture scale, ...and I just happen to have that same lens,

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

Anthony Farr wrote: > calculating bellows > corrections by simply looking at the camera and thinking, "that looks like > 1/2-stop to me" YES! I'm not the only one! :) -Aaron p.s. two years of shooting 4x5 every freakin' day will get you very good at this. - This message is from the Pentax-

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

is absolutely considered a pro-grade camera. Anyone care to enlighten me? Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: "Ptitboul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Dear all, > > of all the critics I read about the new MZ-S, > the one that seems to be the most annoying

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

In a message dated 7/24/01 12:15:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << As a workaround, someone else has said that you cab get 1/3 compensation by overriding the ISO. Personally, my metering is not that accurate so 1/2 stop will do for me. Alternatively, you could go to

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

No, no it doesn't work: opening or closing the aperture by 1/2 stop will only change exposure in the LX if you work in manual mode and exposure compensation is for aperture priority where opening the aperture will result in parallel shortening of the shutter speed. And film speed i

RE: MZ-S exposure compensation

top you are presumably using > an external lightmeter and would probably be in manual mode anyway? > > Rob > > -Original Message- > From: Michael Perham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 24 July 2001 13:32 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: MZ-S exposure com

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

Michael Perham wrote: > > Ptitboul wrote: > > > However, it may be possible that setting the > > exposure compensation ring between the marks > > can give more precision than 1/2-stop. > > > > Can the MZ-S owners on this list check this > > detail

RE: MZ-S exposure compensation

presumably using an external lightmeter and would probably be in manual mode anyway? Rob -Original Message- From: Michael Perham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 July 2001 13:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-S exposure compensation Ptitboul wrote: > However, it may be possi

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

Michael Perham wrote: > Personally, I like the 1/2 exposure settings. > I used the 1/3 setting on the LX and frequently > found that 1/3 was not enough and 2/3 was too > much. So why not just open or close the aperture 1/2 stop ... or adjust the film speed? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PR

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

Ptitboul wrote: > However, it may be possible that setting the > exposure compensation ring between the marks > can give more precision than 1/2-stop. > > But in any case it makes bracketing with > 1/3-stop much more difficult than in most > other Pro cameras, including PZ

MZ-S exposure compensation

Dear all, of all the critics I read about the new MZ-S, the one that seems to be the most annoying is the 1/2-stop exposure compensation. 1/3-stop precision is often needed for slides. However, it may be possible that setting the exposure compensation ring between the marks can give more

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

Tom wrote: > You're saying you can set the dial in-between the detentes and it works? It seems like it by observing shutter speed readout and the exposure bar. Haven't cheked with film yet. Pål - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net an

Re: MZ-S exposure compensation

You're saying you can set the dial in-between the detentes and it works? tv Pål Jensen wrote: > > It seems to me that the MZ-S has stepless exposure compensation. > > Pål > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdm

MZ-S exposure compensation

It seems to me that the MZ-S has stepless exposure compensation. Pål - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

  1   2   >