I'm no expert but number 366 is plainly an incorrect exposure. With no
compensation set by you it is the camera at fault. The matrix metering
did do a pretty good job of avoiding underexposure in 367, as you say.
Is it still under warranty?
James
On 9 Jul 2004, at 6:14 pm, Jim Sharp wrote:
> Nice shots Tom. I can't say I haven't gotten some myself, but here two
> classic examples of how the metering works on my camera. Please! No
> comments on content. Sometimes you have to use a camera for
> snapshots...
>
> http://home.illicom.net/users/jsharp/personalphotos/DSC_0367%208X6.jpg
>
> http://home.illicom.net/users/jsharp/personalphotos/DSC_0366%208X6.jpg
>
> Both of these were shot raw, aperture priority mode, ISO 200, matrix
> metering, tone comp auto, no saturation adjustments, white balance set
> to cloudy, noise reduction auto, standard curve in the camera. All I
> did
> was convert them to jpg and downsize for the web in NC.
>
> Lens was set to f/5.6
>
> Camera determined shutter speed on the first was 1/250
> On the second one 1/60
>
> IOW, there is a full 2 stop difference in what the camera determined
> was
> the correct exposure, even though the shots were taken in identical
> lighting less than 2 minutes apart. Can someone look at those scenes
> and
> tell me how I could look at them and determine I needed to add *2
> stops*
> of EV comp to one to get an exposure that's similar to the other? If
> anything, I'd think the camera would have underexposed the primary
> subject in the second frame given the amount of sky showing. My OM's
> sure would have using center weighted metering. What I'm seeing is the
> opposite of what I'd expect. But who knows, maybe I'm just not that
> good
> at reading a scene...;)
>
> --
> Jim
>
> Tom Scales wrote:
>> Just to give you a reference, here are a few D100 shots. The top two
>> were
>> taken with the SB80DX flash bounced on its little built in bounce
>> card. The
>> next three were with the little popup flash (all five with the 60/2.8
>> Micro). The last two are just outdoor shots.
>>
>> All have very minimal post processing. Just levels and a touch of
>> unsharp
>> mask. The look just 'ok' on the web but are stunning in prints. I've
>> found
>> that any evaluation of the quality of the D100/D70 that is done on a
>> computer monitor undervalues the camera. It takes a good print, on a
>> calibrated system, to make you go WOW. It does not, in my
>> experience, take
>> a heck of a lot of effort. I took the last one in Florida in the
>> morning,
>> printed it and framed it in Harrisburg that night and it was on my
>> wall the
>> next day.
>>
>> The last one is a 20x32" print, matted to 24x36" on my wall at work,
>> printed
>> on my Epson 7600. I 'upsized' it to 360dpi at that size in Photoshop
>> CS.
>> The results are simply unbelievable. The third one (540) is a 16x20"
>> matted
>> to 20x24.
>>
>> My office is covered with my prints.
>>
>> Just my experience.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> http://www.scalesfamily.com/images/Tom/MacroPages/pages/DSC_0308.htm
>> http://www.scalesfamily.com/images/Tom/MacroPages/pages/DSC_0375.htm
>>
>>
>> http://www.scalesfamily.com/images/Tom/NaturePages/pages/DSC_0540.htm
>> http://www.scalesfamily.com/images/Tom/NaturePages/pages/DSC_0043.htm
>> http://www.scalesfamily.com/images/New/pages/DSC_0542.htm
>>
>> http://www.scalesfamily.com/images/Tom/ArchitecturePages/pages/
>> DSC_0035.htm
>> http://www.scalesfamily.com/images/New/pages/DSC_0511.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> ==============================================
>> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>> ==============================================
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
