rainer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>Hi Moose,
>thank you for your elaborate answer!
>Indeed I should havbe been more precise, and perhaps I should try some
>more own research before posing such a type of question. In the case I
>descibed I used Ilford XP, I did not use the DX setting but eventually
>changed the ISO setting for the indoor and outdoor pics between 200 and
>800.
>
I have no experience with XP, but I can say for sure that iso 200 and
800 will give quite different negatives. Both printable, but quite
different. If you are basing your conclusions on automated prints, I
think it is not a meaningful way to test the exposure system of the
camera. Using C-41 process neg film and automated processing, it is
really hard to tell what the exposure system in the camera is doing
because the automated system has such a wide range of automated adjustment.
>I had done that before with an XA with decent results.
>
Same processer/printer? The prints from C-41 process/print can vary a
lot from location to location and over time, as machines age and are
adjusted, operaters change, etc.
>With the OM40 case, I have to admit that I mostly used program mode.
>
Nothing wrong with using program mode in general, it just adds one more
place where the cause of the problem could be.
>I cannot recall if I tried AE. I think I should go back and use some slide film
>to get clearer answers....
>
>
Definitely! Try multiple exposures of each test shot using Manual, AE
and Program and note what exposure they indicate in the viewfinder. That
is the sure way to see what is going on with the exposure system. I
would also consider rewinding a partial roll and completeing it in
another camera body, recreating at least a couple of the test shots.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|