50d over expose

[christopher galeski]

hi to anybody thats looking,does anybody that owns a cannon 50d,find that it seems to over expose on images,I shoot in AV mode,were I dont need to compensate for a particular image,the image always looks too bright.thanks for any help.

[Tell Dickinson]

Hi Chris, best to show us an uncropped example and give us the technical details including what metering mode, raw or jpeg, picture style settings (if jpeg) etc etc etc. Then people can give a better opinion.

Tell

[christopher galeski]

Hi Tell,thanks for your reply,my thread was aimed at people who own a 50d,and felt the same as me,that their camera seems to over expose,butwhen I get time,I willpost an untouched image.thanks again.

[Charlie Woodrich]

When there are any whites against a dark background, on my 50D, I normally adjust the exposure compensation from anywhere from -1/3 to -2/3.

[Mike Milicia]

I have not seen this problem with my 50D.

How do you determine that you "dont need to compensate for a particular image"? It's tough to determine whether or not a given camera's meter is faulty without doing some kind of controlled test. One way is to put the camera in Manual Mode, spot meter a gray card in the same light as your subject, adjust exposure until the meter is at 0, and then take the picture. If you want to do the same using evaluative metering, make sure that the frame is filled with the gray card when you use it to set the exposure. Unless you are photographing a bright white subject in bright, sunny conditions, the exposure should be right where you want it. To render detail in bright white subjects in bright light, you actually need to intentionally underexpose by 2/3 to a full stop.

[Aidan Briggs]

I agree with Mike. I have never had this problem with my 50D. Different cameras need different amounts of light to get a proper exposure. Check your histogram, and get to know your metering system, and you can get the proper exposure every time. I guess it is possible that your camera has some sort of defect though.

[Mike Milicia]

Different cameras need different amounts of light to get a proper exposure.
I think what you meant to say here was that different cameras need different amounts of COMPENSATION for a given scene in various metering modes to get the correct exposure. If they needed different amounts of light, incident meters would not work without dialing in the type of camera.

[Aidan Briggs]

Thanks Mike, that is what I meant.

[John Chardine]

I have found my 50D extraordinarily adept at figuring out the right exposure in Av or Tv mode. If you shoot RAW, you want to be producing images that look over-exposed with no/very little blown highlights before processing. That way you will have as a base, images that have the most information, which you can then use in the processing stage. So bottom line if you shoot RAW, expose to the right (of the histogram), with no blown areas, then bring the exposure back in Adobe Camera Raw.

[christopher galeski]

thankyou all for your replys,and John I shoot in raw.thanks.

[Doug Brown]

I agree with John. Exposure to the right yields a bright-looking image, but that's the way I like to expose my images. You can easily pull back 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop of overexposure in Lightroom. My 50D exposes properly.

[christopher galeski]

thankyou for your input Doug,it may be me,comparing it too much with my 40d.thanks.

[Don Madej]

I have exactly the same problem with my 50d. I previously used a 30d and did not have this problem. I use the av mode and evaluative metering. In high contrast scenes (woods with a bright sky) I often have to set the compensation to -1 to -1.5 to avoid the "blinkies" This is also true when I am shooting white birds, such as egrets. To avoid blowing out the whites, I have to set the compensation to -1 to -1.5. I hesitated to send the camera back to canon, since I thought that the error was on my part. It recently got to the point where I thought of sending it to canon before my november trip to Bosque del Apache. Any thoughts? Thank you.

[Tell Dickinson]

thankyou for your input Doug,it may be me,comparing it too much with my 40d.thanks.I have a 40D and 50D and see no difference in exposure compensation needed for similar subjects between the 2. In difficult situations (white birds etc) I use manual metering.

Tell

[John Chardine]

I have exactly the same problem with my 50d. I previously used a 30d and did not have this problem. I use the av mode and evaluative metering. In high contrast scenes (woods with a bright sky) I often have to set the compensation to -1 to -1.5 to avoid the "blinkies" This is also true when I am shooting white birds, such as egrets. To avoid blowing out the whites, I have to set the compensation to -1 to -1.5. I hesitated to send the camera back to canon, since I thought that the error was on my part. It recently got to the point where I thought of sending it to canon before my november trip to Bosque del Apache. Any thoughts? Thank you.

Don- My intention is not to diminish your problem but this sounds pretty normal behaviour for Auto exposure setting. It's not hard to fool the meter in situations like this. That's why Manual metering is so useful. There is a setting on modern Canon bodies called "Highlight Tone Priority" (C.Fn II:Image, 3-Enable) which may help you in situations like this.

[Charles Glatzer]

John,

It has nothing to do with the Metering Mode and everything to do with the Metering Pattern. It is all about the size of the subject in the frame relative to the background. The deviation/comp from the null point to obtain the correct exposure is the same regardless of the Mode used.

Best,

Chas

[christopher galeski]

Tell,today will test the 40d and 50d,same lens, light,subject etc,against each other.thanks.

[Rocky Sharwell]

There can be variation between different cameras of a particular model. One of many eye openers of my first ever IPT with Artie back in my days of shooting film was on the beach at Blind Pass on Sanibel Island. During a lull in the action Artie had all of the people with an EOS3 set their cameras identically and point at different objects---not every camera gave the same reading...

[John Chardine]

John,

It has nothing to do with the Metering Mode and everything to do with the Metering Pattern. It is all about the size of the subject in the frame relative to the background. The deviation/comp from the null point to obtain the correct exposure is the same regardless of the Mode used.

Best,

Chas

Agree Chas and it was my mistake for using the phrase "Manual metering", when I should have said "Manual Exposure Setting". What I meant by this of course is to set the shutter speed and aperture by hand based on a variety of data and information, but ultimately driven by the effect you are striving for. What I routinely do these days, as many do, is push the RAW exposure to the right as far as possible (ref. histogram) while keeping the highlights below 100% luminosity. I find this is best achieved by setting exposure manually, although it could also be done in one of the auto exposure modes with the appropriate amount of exposure compensation. What will produce exposure errors is taking the meter reading at face value with a standard amount of compensation (which could be zero), without examining an accurate histogram, blinkies or whatever.

Having said all this though I repeat that I am often amazed by how well my 50D and 5D determine what I would consider the correct exposure in very tricky situations.

[Charles Glatzer]

There can be variation between different cameras of a particular model. One of many eye openers of my first ever IPT with Artie back in my days of shooting film was on the beach at Blind Pass on Sanibel Island. During a lull in the action Artie had all of the people with an EOS3 set their cameras identically and point at different objects---not every camera gave the same reading...

Not a valid camera test...different lenses and objects from different viewpoints negates the control.

But, it is valid for showing different objects reflect varing degrees of tonality by using an established null/control point.

I hope he was trying to illustrate the later and you misunderstood.

Chas

[Arthur Morris]

Digital cameras do not create poorly exposed images. Over the past 26 years--19 with film and 7 with digital, I have used the metered exposure as suggested by the camera perhaps 20% of the time. About 10% of the time is likely to be more accurate. With digital all that you need to do is create an image with at least some data in the fifth box. It does not matter how you meter or what you meter. Get some pixels in the highlight box of the histogram and you will have something that you can work with. To move the data to the right, add light to your exposure. If you have clipped highlights, subtract data.

Note to Chas: I was surely having folks point their long lenses at large uniformly toned areas not at specific birds. You should know me better than to think otherwise. And I was not trying to illustrate sooner or later.... <smile>

[Charles Glatzer]

Artie,

If not the sooner or later I am confused as to what you were trying to illustrate? To make sure others understand the control...you are saying the lenses were pointed at similarly uniformly toned areas.

"Get some pixels in the highlight box of the histogram and you will have something that you can work with."

I do agree the end result is what matters most. I just choose to get there when I depress the shutter.

Warm Regards and good shooting,

Chas

[Arthur Morris]

Chas,

re:

If not the sooner or later I am confused as to what you were trying to illustrate?

You wrote, "I hope he was trying to illustrate the later and you misunderstood." What you meant to write was "I hope he was trying to illustrate the latter and you misunderstood." Get it? Latter has two "Ts."

To make sure others understand the control...you are saying the lenses were pointed at similarly uniformly toned areas.

That is of course correct, and as I wrote in my original reply you know me better than to suggest otherwise. The error was Rocky's is stating "and had people point at different objects..."

I am trying then to understand why you wrote "This is not a valid camera test." It would seem that the only explanation is that you were trying to show folks what a skilled and smart instructor you are.... Please correct me if I am wrong.

"Get some pixels in the highlight box of the histogram and you will have something that you can work with."

I do agree the end result is what matters most. I just choose to get there when I depress the shutter.

I am not sure what you mean by that. Please explain.

[Charles Glatzer]

Artie,

Thanks for correcting the spelling error, got it ;)

I wrote the test was not valid based on the information supplied. As this is an educational forum I then explained why and how such a test would also prove beneficial. Least both our statements are misconstrued by those we are trying to educate. Sometimes I may not be as succinct in my writings as desired, I hope when I make statements others will continue to correct or clarify as they have done so in the past so that we all may benefit.

I have always and continue to respect your abilities both in front of and behind the camera. Although, our visual perception may at times vary, most times we come to the same conclusion using different methods.

I prefer when applicable to spend less time in post production, shooting the image as close to correct as possible in-camera. I have seen no real world visual benefit when comparatively viewing actual image detail when I do not have to make the image lighter or for that matter darker in post-production. I do agree on the need to push to the right when the scene contains extreme tonal variation…such as a dark bison on snow, or white headed bald eagle with dark wings. I am not a proponent of something always has to be in the right box, such as low key backgrounds with darker subjects.

I believe there are times when it is prudent to hand hold a 500mm and other times with dropping light and shutter-speed it is not. I believe Av and TTL have their place, as does manual metering and flash. People learning photography often take what we pro photographers say as gospel, and I believe this is a mistake, and I say so about my own statements on every workshop. I believe it is our job to make sure those we guide understand fully all the benefits and ramifications of each method taught and tool at their disposal, without generalization.

I think photographers seeking to better the craft should take classes from many educators, as each has something unique to offer. .


Respectfully,

Chas

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks for responding Chas. I understand and agree with pretty much everything you wrote. But. You state that you based your comment on the "information supplied." I know that you know that I know better than that. Thus I still question your motive for writing what you did when you knew that I knew better. I love Rocky and am not blaming him in any way. All of us need to learn to be very careful whenever we write for public consumption.