I have to check which mode it is.
It has auto mode for metering but I like it manual.
It’s heavily center-weighted metering…
Last edited:
I have to check which mode it is.Which metering mode? I.e. spot or integral/evaluative? This makes a huge difference in terms of your +2 overexposure being a sensible approach or not.
If you work in sport/partial metering mode and you always meter something that's pretty light (i.e. bright sand, a stretch of clear sky) then your +2 compensation may make sense. If you're working in evaluative/integral metering mode and are just pointing the camera in essentially a random direction, then the 'default' +2 you're dialing in is pretty random and reckless.
Read up on metering for starters, then make things complicated if you understand the basics and still feel the need to make it more difficult than it needs to be.
In your place, I would have opted for a camera with a program automatic exposure mode and use that.
This reminds me of the phrase "All hat and no cattle " . That camera is something you use almost instinctively. Someone who has been shooting an M3 for 30 years would be right at home.
Heavily center-weighted.But you're not sure how you're metering...?
The Leica only shoots RAW…
Heavily center-weighted.
TTL metering…
So you're dialing in +2 stops and you measure "over yonder that area pretty much something like that yippiekayee....." That's adventurous. Takes me back to when I just started out with a Mamiya Z-series 35mm camera and slide film.
Ah, and no screen. So you can’t do either without a histogram. Also, iirc the meter is centre weighted off the curtain. That’s going to take some learning given the hard clipping of digital recording. You might well benefit from bracketing exposure, certainly until you learn how to match scene to meter. Also, consider external meter, although this will also have a learning curve.
It depends on the subject matter, how you want it to render, the metering mode, what you point the camera at and a bunch of technical conditions you set for the image.I’m learning +1 is better…
It depends on the subject matter, how you want it to render, the metering mode, what you point the camera at and a bunch of technical conditions you set for the image.
There's no such thing as a default exposure balance one "should" use.
The sky and clouds are very important to me as well as the trees and water. Everything has to be within the “histograms” boundaries…
OK, so given the following:
* Your camera is limited to a (heavily) center-weighted metering program
* The scene is a 'typical' landscape with a foreground of trees and a bright sky (mostly blue, maybe wisps of clouds)
* The horizon in your composition is between 1/3 and 2/3 from the bottom (or top) edge of the frame
(I'm specifically thinking of the kind of images I've seen you post so far):
I would do the following: dial in +2 stops, point camera at sky so the sky fills the viewfinder, take meter reading and lock the reading, then recompose for the desired composition.
This will ensure that the bright sky will be at +2, which with a little bit of luck won't blow out anything unless there are some really bright spots (e.g. a cloud with a sunlit edge). Note that locking the meter reading while pointing the camera at the sky is crucial. If you dial in +2 and point the camera so that the horizon is halfway the frame, you're toast. Same camera settings, only one difference in the way of working...hence why I kept pressing on details. It makes a difference.
Frankly, and this is by no means intended to take a p**s on Leica, but I find the combination of a digital sensor (inherent risk of blown out highlights), center-weighted metering system (uncertainty as to what you're actually measuring and the risk of specular highlights messing up your readings) and no display to verify results (depriving you of a short feedback loop for effective learning) a very unfortunate combination especially for someone who is in the process of learning the basics of exposure. I would very strongly recommend picking up a (cheap) digital camera with a display to practice exposure with. Once you've figured out how that works, it'll be much easier to translate your approach and preferences to the MD262. This learner-camera can be of any type (although I wouldn't opt for a smartphone for this purpose) - mirrorless, SLR, compact.
The greens show up better on my screen.Shooting bright skies with the ground in shadow always is a problem at this time of day or lighting conditions. If you insist on including the sky, then you have to meter for the sky as you have done, or you'll blow it out. Of course, the shadows go too dark. You could try a graduated ND filter, let's say 2 stops.
Shot this scene at +1…
Yeah, that's what @Alan Edward Klein referred to; a scene like that is basically unphotographable on digital or slide film. You always lose something.
Personally, I also find it a good example of a confused photograph. What's it about? Once you figure that out, the problem generally goes away, too, since you'll change the composition to suit the purpose.
Korak’s suggestion to get a camera with a display and, ideally, histogram is good. I think with the 262(?) I’d be bracketing exposure whenever I could and biasing towards slight under exposure - that’s easier to fix in Lightroom - if I couldn’t bracket. Given the hard clipping of highlights in digital that would be my approach when I could even after learning the meter.
I think it’s been said before - it’s like slide film. Negative film in an MA is far more forgiving, as long as you give it enough exposure!
3. The MD 262 is very challenging to master…
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?