Puzzled by the meter in my X-E1...

[willie_901]

I agree - I'd have thought they would be required to operate to the Standard, in order to use the ISO rating.
However, if you looked at the sites I mentioned, you will have seen that there are plenty of people discussing the possibility that this is not the case. IDK.😕

Well, FUJIFILM is a member of a Japanese organization CIPA, Camera & Imaging Products Association. These CIPA guidelines recommends CIPA members measure/calibrate sensitivity using either the Standard Output Sensitivity (SOS) or Recommended Exposure Index (REI) methods.

The International Standards Organization publishes more than one standard for camera sensitivity (ISO).

CIPA members are not obligated to follow any of the International Standards Organization protocols.

However the issue of what standard applies can not explain the two stop problem you report. The reports of sensitivity discrepancies you mention are a diversion from the strange behavior you'r experiencing.

 

[shimokita]

Whenever I transfer the settings from the meter to the camera, the image is underexposed by two stops!

What is underexposed by two stops and how do you confirm that it's 2 stops underexposed?

1) My understanding is that you are comparing the settings from the light meter to the in-camera exif data when the camera is set to P or A mode.

One possible interpretation is that the camera has chosen the settings that it thinks will give the best results, which include rendering considerations as well as the exposure options. The meter has always been used to suggest an exposure to the photographer.

2) When setting the camera manually, does the exif data match the manual settings?

If the settings match, then I don't see a problem.

3) The camera and metered settings match but the in-camera JPG "looks" under/over expose

Then one conclusion might be that the in-camera JPG is Fuji's interpretation of the scene and under some conditions it has a build it "preference" for lighter / darker rendering. The same as the photographer might choose to post process an image in different ways. How the color looks seems to be a major part of Fuji X experience. The in-camera JPG is an interpretation.

4) There is something in the camera set-up that is impacting the results... or there is a problem with that specific camera.

Hard to say... Given the menu layering it's not that easy to follow the developer's logic and/or maybe Fuji doesn't like that particular adapter or there is a problem with that specific camera. Testing with a native Fuji lens (and no adapter) may shed some light on the matter.

I like the way the x100t in-camera JPG looks... it is different from the results out of my other cameras.

 

[Mister_Jelly]

Well, FUJIFILM is a member of a Japanese organization CIPA, Camera & Imaging Products Association. These CIPA guidelines recommends CIPA members measure/calibrate sensitivity using either the Standard Output Sensitivity (SOS) or Recommended Exposure Index (REI) methods.

The International Standards Organization publishes more than one standard for camera sensitivity (ISO).

CIPA members are not obligated to follow any of the International Standards Organization protocols.

However the issue of what standard applies can not explain the two stop problem you report. The reports of sensitivity discrepancies you mention are a diversion from the strange behavior you'r experiencing.

Well, even if they don't have to follow the standard, it is my opinion that if they are not following it, they are limiting the number of applications for their products by not following the standards (just think about stuff like studio flashes and hand held meters)

IF they are not following the standard, that is... Still no proof for that.

What is underexposed by two stops and how do you confirm that it's 2 stops underexposed?

1) My understanding is that you are comparing the settings from the light meter to the in-camera exif data when the camera is set to P or A mode.

One possible interpretation is that the camera has chosen the settings that it thinks will give the best results, which include rendering considerations as well as the exposure options. The meter has always been used to suggest an exposure to the photographer.

2) When setting the camera manually, does the exif data match the manual settings?

If the settings match, then I don't see a problem.

3) The camera and metered settings match but the in-camera JPG "looks" under/over expose

Then one conclusion might be that the in-camera JPG is Fuji's interpretation of the scene and under some conditions it has a build it "preference" for lighter / darker rendering. The same as the photographer might choose to post process an image in different ways. How the color looks seems to be a major part of Fuji X experience. The in-camera JPG is an interpretation.

4) There is something in the camera set-up that is impacting the results... or there is a problem with that specific camera.

Hard to say... Given the menu layering it's not that easy to follow the developer's logic and/or maybe Fuji doesn't like that particular adapter or there is a problem with that specific camera. Testing with a native Fuji lens (and no adapter) may shed some light on the matter.

I like the way the x100t in-camera JPG looks... it is different from the results out of my other cameras.

Thank you for your reply. To answer your questions, using the same numbers you used:

1. No, I am shooting in manual mode. First I take a reading with the hand held meter, than I set the fuji to the recommended F stop and shutter speed. The in-display light meter shows two stops of underexposure, and the image on the screen is also severely underexposed.

2. see above

3. could be the jpeg, but also the camera and meter settings do not match

4. I will try with a native lens and post the results here...