Lots of interesting posts on this, much info.
But lets get down to it.
In 366, in spite of being given orders to overexpose slightly and having
a large expanse of bright sky, the camera did an excellent job of
exposing for the main subject.
In 367, it badly underexposes a really ordinary scene. There is only one
sensible conclusion. Something in not working properly. Ruminations
about matrix aside, I can't believe that any modern exposure system
could miss this badly. This is just not an exotic lighting situation.
So what could be wrong?
Lens? You say a N*** zoom, I assume the same for each pic. EXIF contains
focal length, maximum available f-stop and exposure f-stop. So it would
appear to be a proper lens for the camera, at least it communicates with
it. Both shots were at f5.6. So it doesn't seem likely that it is the
lens, but the lens is older than the camera. Confirmation through uae of
another lens and/or results with this lens on another camera would confirm.
Camera? There are a couple of clues in the EXIF.
#366: Exposure Time 1/60 , F-stop f5.6, Exposure Program Aperture
priority - Flash undefined value
#367: Exposure Time 1/250, F-stop f5.6, Exposure Program Manual - Flash
did not fire
So in the same light, but without a lot of bright sky in the background
and at the same aperture, the camera selects a shutter speed 2 stops
faster! Now why would it do that?
- Well, the EXIF says it didn't! It says it was under Manual control for
the poor exposure. So either you changed the setting, perhaps
inadvertently, or the camera does so on it's own and needs repair.
- Because the exposure system knew flash would be needed? Notice that in
the Flash section of the EXIF for 366 says 'undefined value', while in
367, it says 'did not fire' That sounds to me like it was expected or
needed to fire but didn't. Now you say it was set for no flash. So it is
possible that the 'did not fire' is a comment that flash was needed, but
not selected. Of course the flash sync is only rated to 1/180 on the
D100, so a manually selected speed of 1/250 probably prevents the flash
from firing anyway.
So what can be concluded from the samples? It is possible that there is
something wrong with the camera, but that can't be concluded from these
samples. Further careful testing is required to be sure whether the
change of mode from AP to Manual was an external or an internal event.
If external, it appears the camera did as instructed; it took an
underexposed picture. I doubt if these pics will convince Nikon Service
there is a problem, if they read the EXIFs, without further clarity on
settings.
Moose
*Also, what kind of camera doesn't show the iso setting in the EXIF??
Jim Sharp wrote:
>Nope, I was set to auto focus and for no flash, using a Nikkor zoom
>borrowed from my SO.
>
>As this conversation has progressed I'm wondering more all the time if
>my camera doesn't need a trip to Nikon service. Now that I've identified
>some good example photos at least I have something to point them to
>that's better than "I think my camera's metering is broken..."
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|