Under Exposed results with

[JimG]

More then 1/2 the my photos from my Bessa R with the Xenon lens are under exposed despite what the light meter tells me. As I change the aperture the meter responds so I assume this lens should be capable of providing a correct reading? I know I could learn to compensate for the difference, but is there a way to adjust the lens so it will work with the meter?

 

[kaiyen]

I doubt it's the lens. How are you metering? What are you metering (shadows, highlights)? Is the scene contrasty, low contrast, bright, dark? What type of lighting?

allan

 

[JimG]

Hey Allan- It seems worse when the light is overcast or hazy and low cotrast. The subject can be a distant vista or a couple feet away. When I can, I get close up and read from the shadows. I don't have this problem, to this degree at least with any other lens, or that matter with any other camera/ lens combination.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

is the lens coated ?

 

[kaiyen]

The lens coating issue is a good question, though the impact shouldn't be _that_ major, or at least all the time, unless you're _trying_ to get flare all the time (thereby throwing the meter off).

If you're metering the shadows, are you adjusting exposure from that, or shooting at that reading? If you aren't, you're technically overexposing based on your previsualization, but it's still nec. to understand your exact procedure. If you're meetering the shadows, you should then close down by 2 stops.

What film is this? At what EI are you rating it? And, finally, you're sure it's underexposure, right? Lack of shadow (not highlight or negative density) detail? Not lack of contrast?

allan

 

[JimG]

No coating, it's a 1937 Leitz lens. Attached example, contrast was lower, I had to bring it up a bit in PhotoShop. Film is HP5. With this a shoot I just went with what the meter said. JimG

 

[JimG]

Maybe it's not under exposure, but when I look at the negatives there not as contrasty as when I use more modern (coated lenses). There washed out looking.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

If you were using an external meter, ir would make sense. But your meter is TTL. Whatever light gets transmitted through the lens is what the meter reads.

This is a 7 element in 5 group lens. Each glass-to-air surface loses 4%. That adds up to ~1/3rd of a stop or so.

Remember that the Bessa R's meter pattern is biased (toward the lower left?); see cameraquest.com. Just in case this is photo-content throwing the exposure.

 

[JimG]

I wasn't aware of the bias or about glass to air surface loss. I need to get used to using these older lenses since having them was a major reason for choosing the R. Thanks' JimG

 

[wlewisiii]

I think, from my experiances with uncoated lenses, that transmission loss is a more significant issue than we realize these days. It's actually noticable comparing my B&L Tessar (~213mm/6.3) lens with even my very early coating Ektar 127/4.7 (also a Tessar design); I wonder what it would be like if I ever get myself a modern multi-coated lens?

William

 

[kaiyen]

It actually sounds like you're overexposing. If you're metering the shadows then shooting at that rating, you are putting those shadows at middle grey, rather than actually as the shadows. You are therefore overexposing the shadows, reducing contrast (what was supposed to be near black is now middle grey). You have apparently already compensated for this in development, since the highlights are not only controlled but actually really, really flat.

I can do this in Zone-ese but it's not really nec, I don't think.

Is this also happening when you don't meter the shadows? Do you have an external meter? Have you tried metering a grey card with your R, then using an incident reading? Are they the same?

Underexposure would increase contrast.

allan

 

[JimG]

I've read Ansil Adam's book on zone photography and more or less understand it. I sometimes use a handheld meter (a Sekonic L Model) when I need to or I can. Generally like allot of photographers I only read the built-in meter and determine if it's consistent for the whole subject or if I need to adjust the aperture to get better definition in the shadows. What I question is why do I only have this problem with the older lenses. Your questions are very helpful to me as they are making me reexamine how I shoot. I'm just recently changed from using SLR's for many years to RF's and in some ways it's like starting over with a new medium. Thanks' JimG