R-D1 metering characteristic?

[RichC]

Just a quick question.

I've noticed that my R-D1 shots are generally underexposed by just under 1/3rd of a stop when using the meter: is this just me/my camera, or is this characteristic of all R-D1 cameras?

 

[zetablues]

mine too, always set AE +0,3 or +0,6
regards

 

[rvaubel]

Now that you mention it...maybe but I have always thought it was due to the center-bottom weighted nature of the metering. I wish the R-D1 had spot metering as an option.
Rex

 

[Sean Reid]

It depends on the lighting. Indoors in incandescent light it will normally be under by about 2/3 stop. Outdoors, it's usually pretty close, perhaps 1/3 stop over or under. The important thing is that it's consistent so with practice one gets to know just how to tweak it.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Sean Reid]

It depends on the lighting. Indoors in incandescent light it will normally be under by about 2/3 stop. Outdoors, it's usually pretty close, perhaps 1/3 stop over or under. The important thing is that the metering consistent within a given lighting condition so with practice one gets to know just how to tweak the exposure.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[erikhaugsby]

The metering pattern can have an effect on the exposure, too, depending on where highlights and lowlights are in the frame.

Thenagain, this does only concern individual frames and not a general trend of all frames.

 

[sevres_babylone]

I find that it is pretty accurate in the daytime without any adjustment. I do find that I was underexposing in my night shots and in my concert shots, so I have made adjustments. One site that helped me was Mr. Oshima's pbase site, because he includes his exposure data. I have referred to it before. He uses the R-D1 a lot: http://www.pbase.com/tommyoshima/visions_of_metropolis

I would compare what adjustment he made to what I would have done, and I can see that where I would have closed down a third or even two-thirds, he was opening up. Reading Sean's comments I can see that the artificial light is a big factor.

Generally though I am pleased with the AE results. I was hooked on spot metering with my OM4, and thought that I was going to miss spot metering more than I have.

 

[RichC]

Thanks for your replies.

I was just curious, really - I always shoot in raw mode, so it isn't a problem, more an observation; anyway, I'm sure you could start short wars arguing about "correct" exposure! Still, I think I'll try an experiment for a while, and set the camera to overexpose by 0.3 stop.

The meter seems very consistent out of doors (for me at least), and I think it's well designed - it's easy to predict and compensate, if needed. It definitely appears biased towards the bottom of the frame, and I wouldn't be suprised if it's not the same meter used in later Bessa models, which Cameraquest describes as "bottom weighted ... the greatest meter sensitivity is roughly at the lower left intersection of the rule of thirds".

 

[Jim Watts]

In sun light I find the meter accurate or perhaps I -0.3.
Flat overcast U.K. winter light I add about +0.6.
Incandescent I add +0.6 to +1.0.

I do check the histogram if there is time and it wouldn't cause me to loose a shot, but its not very convienient with no quick review of the screen mode with the histogram. Hopefully this is something that the promised firmware upgrade will cure.

 

[fgianni]

If you shoot raw you should not be worried about underexposing up to 1 stop, overexposure is of course much more likely to ruin the shot.

 

[Jim Watts]

Ian,
IMHO Still worth "exposing to the right" to maximise the dynamic range, even in raw. As long as you don't risk blowing the highlights.

 

[robert blu]

Maybe my is a stupid question (please excuse me) , but do you really notice a 0.3 difference in exposure ? How do you ? On a file ? on a print ? I have not this camera (considering it...) and curious to know more.

 

[pfogle]

I find when adjusting the exposure in RAW, that what looks quite a large shift is rarely more than 0.6, assuming the sliders are in stops. It seems like adjustments in digital are more visible than on film, if that makes sense. You can certainly see 0.3 stop difference on the screen.

Looking inside the camera, the comment by RichC about the weighting being at the intersection of the lower left thirds makes sense, as the cell is looking at the top right part of the shutter curtain, and that's weighted towards the center (the white stripe).

I think the meter's been set to help people avoid blown highlights in jpgs, but it's not optimal for RAW shooters, at least for me, as you do have the headroom in RAW to set the AE to +2/3 with no trouble. I do hate wasted space at the right end of the histogram!

 

[J. Borger]

The basic question is always .. what is right exposure??
I find myself adjusting exposure in the raw converter quite a lot.
+ or - .. even when exposure is right ( a wonderful spread histogram) i want to over or underexpose to change the mood of a picture.
Exposure defines the look of a picture .... but there is no such thing as right exposure.
So why worry about 1/3 stop off from some technical devise called a "meter"?

I can understand not wanting to block the shadows and keeping the highlights to keep all options open for processing/ printing. But that's all that counts for me.
The histogram is a perfect guide for this!

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

what is right exposure??

The one that you like and doesn't make you go insane with post-shot compensations to get the overall scene "right".

 

[J. Borger]

The one that you like ....

Yes .. that's the only correct answer 😉

 

[fgianni]

Maybe my is a stupid question (please excuse me) , but do you really notice a 0.3 difference in exposure ? How do you ? On a file ? on a print ? I have not this camera (considering it...) and curious to know more.

You can see a 0.3 shift on screen, of course a 1/3 or even a 2/3 shift on the underexposure side is usually easily fixed in camera raw, so you probably won't be able to see the difference in the processed image, on the overexposure side is more risky since no sofware on earth can recover blown highlights.

 

[rvaubel]

I started to use the "blown highlight" overlay function to decide exposure. I let spectral reflections and anything I deem OK to be blown to "flash in black" . This way I can expose to the right as much as possible. I prefer this to the histogram since its too small and too hard to interpret just what is going over the right edge. The flashing black mode solves this problem for me.
Rex

 

[Phil_Hawkes]

I started to use the "blown highlight" overlay function to decide exposure. I let spectral reflections and anything I deem OK to be blown to "flash in black" . This way I can expose to the right as much as possible. I prefer this to the histogram since its too small and too hard to interpret just what is going over the right edge. The flashing black mode solves this problem for me.
Rex

This is my approach also.

Phil