Leicaflex SL2 vs Canon F1

[Les Sarile]

...in the ballpark, pretty close, good enough, if you screw up the developing exposure won't matter, fixable in Photoshop, that is what I intended all along, what's this about mercury batteries?, I prefer a dense negative, film has a lot of latitude, meter error compensates for shutter speed error, my personal exposure index is about half box speed, these are not the meter readings you are looking for...

Seriously, I am sure that Leica SL2 metering is fine.

Yup, most color negatives and b&w have so much latitude - specially overexposure, that a half a box speed won't matter at all. How about +10 overexposure . . .

Kodak Portra 400 overexposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

This realization has given me a lot more enjoyment shooting non-metered bodys!

 

[Huss]

E-6 film does not like exposure deviation.
C-41 and B&W does not mind overexposure, but in general falls apart very quickly if underexposed. It's why I err for too much vs too little exposure!

 

[Les Sarile]

E-6 film does not like exposure deviation.
C-41 and B&W does not mind overexposure, but in general falls apart very quickly if underexposed. It's why I err for too much vs too little exposure!

Fuji RVP/Velvia 50 is very narrow but Velvia 100, Provia a little less narrow. Kodak E100 and Fuji Sensia were more then 2 stops.

This Portra 200/400 have at least 2 stops underexposure range - to go with the overexposure, and was surprised how wide Ektar's latitude is considering how much more contrasty it is.

 

[Huss]

Fuji RVP/Velvia 50 is very narrow but Velvia 100, Provia a little less narrow. Kodak E100 and Fuji Sensia were more then 2 stops.

This Portra 200/400 have at least 2 stops underexposure range - to go with the overexposure, and was surprised how wide Ektar's latitude is considering how much more contrasty it is.

2 stops under range? I've found it gets murky past 1 stop under.