duckmcf
Member
Hi Gang,
I’m 3 rolls into my new-to-me GA645i and I’d like to get some thoughts from the collective on how to get the best out of the GA645i’s exposure meter. Right off the top, I’m fairly confident that the problems I’m having are my fault and not the camera’s meter and so any advice you can give would be very much appreciated.
My back story is that before being seduced by the dark side of photography (digital), I used to shoot a load of 35mm colour negative film. I’m now finding my way to film and to add to my exposure issues, I’ve doubled down by also leaping into 6x4.5 MF and transparency film (Velvia and Provia).
So, here’s the thing, when shooting E6 on my Nikon F80 (N80) its matrix meter more or less nails the exposure most of the time, while my GA is a bit more hit and miss. My thinking is that the GA’s centre weighted meter isn’t as forgiving as Nikon Matrix meter, which I guess is no surprise, but it’s even less forgiving that I thought it would, or should, be.
Here are some examples:
In even light, and to my E6-Noob eye, the GA really nails it.
F16 1/250 Provia 400
But in light that’s a little more challenging, and I’m really provoking it in the following examples, I’m getting a higher proportion of misses than I’d like.
F11 1/180 Velvia 100 -- F9.5 1/125 Velvia 100
It seems that if there’s a hint of sky in the frame, that’s outside of what I’d consider in scope for a “Centre Weighted” pattern the meter seems to be taking into account the light from the whole frame and exposing accordingly.
Anyway, it’s a new toy and I know that using it as a point and shoot for a low flying 7y.o. is probably not letting show its best, but I’d love to get some advice on working with the GA’s meter as well as how and when to use exposure compensation on my GA.
I’m 3 rolls into my new-to-me GA645i and I’d like to get some thoughts from the collective on how to get the best out of the GA645i’s exposure meter. Right off the top, I’m fairly confident that the problems I’m having are my fault and not the camera’s meter and so any advice you can give would be very much appreciated.
My back story is that before being seduced by the dark side of photography (digital), I used to shoot a load of 35mm colour negative film. I’m now finding my way to film and to add to my exposure issues, I’ve doubled down by also leaping into 6x4.5 MF and transparency film (Velvia and Provia).
So, here’s the thing, when shooting E6 on my Nikon F80 (N80) its matrix meter more or less nails the exposure most of the time, while my GA is a bit more hit and miss. My thinking is that the GA’s centre weighted meter isn’t as forgiving as Nikon Matrix meter, which I guess is no surprise, but it’s even less forgiving that I thought it would, or should, be.
Here are some examples:
In even light, and to my E6-Noob eye, the GA really nails it.
F16 1/250 Provia 400
But in light that’s a little more challenging, and I’m really provoking it in the following examples, I’m getting a higher proportion of misses than I’d like.
F11 1/180 Velvia 100 -- F9.5 1/125 Velvia 100
It seems that if there’s a hint of sky in the frame, that’s outside of what I’d consider in scope for a “Centre Weighted” pattern the meter seems to be taking into account the light from the whole frame and exposing accordingly.
Anyway, it’s a new toy and I know that using it as a point and shoot for a low flying 7y.o. is probably not letting show its best, but I’d love to get some advice on working with the GA’s meter as well as how and when to use exposure compensation on my GA.
skibeerr
Well-known
Try this,
focus and hold the mf button, locks focus
point at middle gray in the scene, grass, inside of your hand, etc and half press the shutter, locks metering. Apply brain.
sounds complicated but it is not.
focus and hold the mf button, locks focus
point at middle gray in the scene, grass, inside of your hand, etc and half press the shutter, locks metering. Apply brain.
sounds complicated but it is not.
duckmcf
Member
Thanks for that, I'll give it a try.
Locking the focus and then metering elsewhere sounds like it'd be faster and more intuitive than estimating and entering a level of exposure compensation.