Manual vs Av and Other Modes

[Roger Clark]

Certainly the end justifies the means, and I am not stating one overall method is better than an other. What I am saying is that one needs to comprehend how it all works together to be able to make an informed decision in a given circumstance.

Chas,
I agree. This is the key.

Lenses alter perspective

I disagree. Position alters perspective. Lenses limit and magnify the field of view but do not change perspective.

Many think Auto Priority Modes are easier, they are not.

They are both easier, faster, and more accurate in SOME situations, but not all. I gave one example yesterday (changing light).

I say without doubt a huge percentage of those I have taught over the years , including pros and amateurs, do not fully comprehend metering. Sure they get good images, but their hit rate could be vastly improved.

Chas, when you say this, what do you think their "hit rate" on great exposures is that could be "vastly improved" and what do you think an experienced person after such "improvement" should have as their hit rate?

Roger

[Roger Clark]

Because if the lighting is the same just changing the aperture (opening it one would presume given the scenario) would result in a bad exposure/overexposure.

I gather that we agree that manual mode is not "better". If not, ok, we don't.

In some situations manual is better. Yesterday I gave an example where Av mode would be better than manual. Here is an example where manual is better than any of the auto modes:

I was photographing a brown bear at the base of Brooks Falls, Alaska. The huge male bear was on the bank on the other side of the river under an overhanging bank with dark wet soil behind him. The day was light hazy sun with stable light, slightly diffuse (very nice light). The bear would jump into the foamy water to catch salmon. If one used any auto exposure mode when the bear made the jump, the exposure would change radically as the bear moved from a dark background to the white foamy water. The metering system would vary the exposure by many stops during the jump even though the light on the bear was constant. I metered the white water, set manual and exposure to not clip the water and could photograph the action for tens of minutes without worry that the exposure was correct. Manual works best in this situation: constant light on the subject, varying backgrounds.

As with any set of tools, one may best for a particular application, but no one tool works best for all situations. The key is selecting the best to for the particular application.

Roger

[Arthur Morris]

Just a general comment here as I have no desire to get into a piss-fight with any of the fine folks above :)

If you know how to get the right exposure when working in Manual mode then you must know how to get the right exposure using an automatic mode like Av or Tv. Why? Because the right exposure is the right exposure. And the histogram does not know what mode you were in when you made the image :)

Yes, Av with Evaluative metering can be tricky when working with an unusually light or dark subject and yes, it can be tricky depending on the size of the subject in the frame, and yes it can be tricky when the background is changing rapidly.

However, there are many situations where the light is relatively constant, the subject is either small in the frame or of a fairly consistent tonal value, and the BKGR is fairly consistent. In those (and other situations) if find that using Av or Tv is faster and works perfectly for me. In addition, as I mentioned earlier, if you do not know whether your subject is gonna be in sun or shade competent photographers working in Av can get to the right place way faster than someone working in manual mode and in such situations it does not matter if you are Chas Glatzer or Roman CUrry-check or God :)

For Bill Maraldo, I very rarely make big exposure errors when working in Av. I find it much easier to make a gross error when working in Manual mode. If you forget where you are in an automatic mode, you are gonna be pretty close most of the time.... Not so with Manual mode. When I know where I am my keeper rate for correct exposures is 100% whether I am in Manual mode or an automatic mode.

I will expand the above into an illustrated blog post at some point and provide a link here. In the meantime, those who insist that real photographers work in Manual mode all the time will be missing some good images at times. From where I sit know when to use manual and when to work in an auto mode is a good policy.

BTW, when the light is constant, the BKGR may be changing rapidly, and the tonalities of a B&W subject occupy varying portions of the frame it is of course correct to work in Manual mode. I have nothing against Manual mode and use it a good portion of the time :)

[Roger Clark]

If you use any "auto" mode you are giving up control to the camera. Period. This seems obvious.

Auto is strictly for convenience, and though faster(which computers have the edge over use humans), much more likely to make errors. This is because there is no way a camera can be "programmed" with all the relevant information needed for the proper exposure for any particular scene. It doesn't know what is most important or what the photographer wants as the focal point, it can't tell what is the foreground or background and incessantly tries to average everything out.

Bill,
Actually with the multiple exposure sensors in today's cameras, combined with all the AF points, the camera can tell what is foreground and background and weight the exposure accordingly. On some cameras you can tie the exposure to the selected AF point if desired.

It doesn't know that light reflects off different material differently and this effects exposure. It doesn't even know that dark materials need more exposure and light materials need less.

Actually, the exposure is the same. If you want bright things to look bright in your image and dark things to look dark, the exposure is the same. Example: black horse in snow.

It is so stupid in that area you have to waste time figuring what exposure compensation to use. And you are supposed to constantly monitor it to check for errors?

And in manual mode you don't have to constantly check the exposure? And how do you decide what the exposure is in the first place? One typically views a reading from a meter, then do a test exposure to check that the meter is right or not, then adjust from there. A few seconds later and the light changes while the subject is moving (different backgrounds), and what do you do? How much time do you "waste" figuring out the new exposure?

Manual exposure is so simple; expose to the right to the point of highlight clipping, that a histogram and clipping indicators make a meter, with all its errors, obsolete.

So what do you do when the light is changing (e.g. a hole in the clouds opens up for the first time that day and the subject is walking out of a shady area? Can you determine the new exposure in a fraction of a second what the exposure is? How about the next second when the light changes again? If one had been working in manual mode all morning, one probably missed this event.

I also wonder, for those people that swear by auto modes, what keeper rate they have?

What keeper rate do you have in manual mode in rapidly changing light situations?

This being said, under very rapidly changing lighting conditions I use aperture priority, all other times manual. This is because a series of images with errors(where some might not be too severe and by chance correct) is better than no series at all since my fingers on the thumbwheels are too slow.
regards~Bill

Ah Ha! So manual isn't the best mode in all situations.

Roger

[Roger Clark]

Artie,

I agree 100%. well said.

Roger

[Charles Glatzer]

Artie,

Pissing contest? Read all my posts. I teach all methods providing the student with a firm understanding of the fundamentals so that they can make an informed decision. Nothing more, or less. As we both know one method is not the end all and I said so in my posting under this topic, and to every participant.

We have been down this road on lighting as well, wink. Different strokes for different folks.

Warm regards and see ya in FL,

Chas

[Desmond Chan]

Because if the lighting is the same just changing the aperture (opening it one would presume given the scenario) would result in a bad exposure/overexposure.

Hence my: "If you want to change the aperture in order to change the depth-of-field?" which of course means changing the look of the final image. Otherwise, there's no reason to change the aperture simply because the background has changed.

I gather that we agree that manual mode is not "better". If not, ok, we don't.

I personally don't think manual mode is better all the time under all situations. And my answer to Artie's question is, allow me to repeat myself: "No. I don't see the logic that they should."

[Arthur Morris]

Artie,

Pissing contest? Read all my posts. I teach all methods providing the student with a firm understanding of the fundamentals so that they can make an informed decision. Nothing more, or less. As we both know one method is not the end all and I said so in my posting under this topic, and to every participant.

We have been down this road on lighting as well, wink. Different strokes for different folks.

Warm regards and see ya in FL,

Chas

What I said was that I did not want to get into a point by point pissing contest with anyone. :) We pretty much agree on metering and modes: understand them all and know which to use when.

BTW, Chas is one of the very few who I know of who knows how to use a hand held meter.... That said, 98% of the photographers that I work with, many of whom are fine photographers, simply do not understand exposure theory at all.

[Desmond Chan]

[snip]expose to the right to the point of highlight clipping, that a histogram and clipping indicators make a meter, with all its errors, obsolete.

Errr...it won't work in this situation:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...16-Spotted-Owl

In that situation, as long as the owl is the main subject, unless the photographer throws some more light to the owl through the use of fill-flash or reflector(if possible ), simply exposing till the highlight starts to clip will result in the owl under-exposed (as originally posted). The key still is, to get the correct exposure, one has to know when to stray away from the "suggestion" of the exposure meter or histogram (regardless if you use auto or manual exposure mode) and when to trust it.

[Charles Glatzer]

Roger,

Originally Posted by Charles Glatzer
Lenses alter perspective
I disagree. Position alters perspective. Lenses limit and magnify the field of view but do not change perspective.

Correct. My point being a lens is more than a just an in-camera cropping tool, affording the photographer with far more creative options. You know what I meant, wink.

Originally Posted by Charles Glatzer
Many think Auto Priority Modes are easier, they are not.
They are both easier, faster, and more accurate in SOME situations, but not all. I gave one example yesterday (changing light).

Easier and faster, yes. More accurate? I would say that depends on the situation at hand and the photog's knowledge. We could go back and forth on this one.

Originally Posted by Charles Glatzer
I say without doubt a huge percentage of those I have taught over the years , including pros and amateurs, do not fully comprehend metering. Sure they get good images, but their hit rate could be vastly improved.
Chas, when you say this, what do you think their "hit rate" on great exposures is that could be "vastly improved" and what do you think an experienced person after such "improvement" should have as their hit rate?

If you unsure what method to use to derive a correct subject exposure in any given light you need further understanding. Of course nowadays you fire on an image, check the histogram and tweak away. And, if you learn from this all is well. But, most i have seen do not use the histogram as tool to judge their initial exposure methodology. They simply make the image lighter or darker based on the histogram, making the same mistake in the future. I do not care if they use Program mode...as long as they can be consistent. I have judged more photo contests, and viewed more photog's images these past years than I can remember. Most fail because of poor exposure, bad comp, and soft focus. In fact over 85% of images get rejected the first round for the above.

I would guess the average participant has about a 55-60% rate of nailing exposure first time. Striving for 90% thereafter.

Nowhere in this topic do I say I never use Av, nor should others.

Chas

[Charles Glatzer]

What I said was that I did not want to get into a point by point pissing contest with anyone. :) We pretty much agree on metering and modes: understand them all and know which to use when.

BTW, Chas is one of the very few who I know of who knows how to use a hand held meter.... That said, 98% of the photographers that I work with, many of whom are fine photographers, simply do not understand exposure theory at all.

Artie,

Thanks for the reply. Guess we should consider it job security.

See ya soon,

Chas

[Daniel Cadieux]

If you use any "auto" mode you are giving up control to the camera. Period. This seems obvious.

With the camera on full auto (green box) yes, but put it in P, AV, or TV and press the shutter button without making any EC...you'll find out quick enough that you need to be more in control than you think with those modes...

Interesting discussion all - very informative for everyone.

[John Chardine]

If you use any "auto" mode you are giving up control to the camera. Period. This seems obvious.

Auto is strictly for convenience, and though faster(which computers have the edge over use humans), much more likely to make errors. This is because there is no way a camera can be "programmed" with all the relevant information needed for the proper exposure for any particular scene. It doesn't know what is most important or what the photographer wants as the focal point, it can't tell what is the foreground or background and incessantly tries to average everything out. It doesn't know that light reflects off different material differently and this effects exposure. It doesn't even know that dark materials need more exposure and light materials need less. It is so stupid in that area you have to waste time figuring what exposure compensation to use. And you are supposed to constantly monitor it to check for errors? And you want to let it make exposure decisions on a shot that you might or might not ever get again?
I think not!

-snip-
regards~Bill

Bill- I use mostly manual too but auto exposure is not quite as dumb as you make out. I remember back in my Nikon film days I used a F90x. That body according to Nikon had a database of scenes and in real time it would compare the actual tonality of the scene you are photographing against the database and come up with an exposure compensation. The body could identify various types of scenes based on the exposure values in each cell of its matrix metering system. I am not sure whether the digital Nikons or Canons of today do the same thing. The proof of the pudding was that I was often amazed by how well the exposures came out, even in difficult situations.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

Obviously I may have a tendancy to oversimplify, as a reaction to the trend to make things seem much more complicated than they need to be (IMHO). I consider most of you guys better and far more accomplished photographers than I , regardless of whether you use manual exposure or not. The proof is in the pudding.
I also never made the claim that auto modes aren't occasionally useful, just that they are error prone.

Nonetheless, let me run by what I consider the biggest advantage of manual exposure. On the onset, I am not referring to intentionally creating motion blurs or anything fancy, or about focus aquisition. Also, hard to believe I know, there are situations that proper exposure is not possible, regardless of what mode you use. A black and white bird with high contrast light, for example.
I generally have a good idea what shutter-speed I need and what DOF will be required. These variables are actually not too difficult to ascertain. A shutter-speed high enough to avoid motion blur, a DOF that includes the subject yet not so great as to include the background. Lets just say that it would be better if these remained constant for the scene.
Wouldn't it be better that you didn't have to change these variables to get proper exposure? With auto you are forced to sacrifice speed for aperture or vise versa. Is there an arguement here?
Only in the case of an increase in shutter-speed will this not have an effect on the image, and not deviate on what I intended. Otherwise it is a major source of errors; insufficient shutter-speed or incorrect DOF.
With manual exposure it is not necessary to sacrifice the shutter-speed or aperture you need to get proper exposure. You are sacrificing something though, and that is a lower ISO, but if you are pushing exposure anyway (aren't you?) and you are minimizing noise anyway.
Let me repeat; too fast a shutter-speed will not effect image quality. This gives you any shutter-speed above the the minimum to work with, and any exposure can be achieved with right or left clicks with one just one thumb wheel. Basically you start with a faster speed than you need, reduce toward the motion blur point to increase exposure, and go the other way to decrease exposure. Need more light and you've reached the minimum shutter-speed? Just up the ISO and start over; a higher SS than you need and right or left clicks with the SS thumbwheel as needed.
The starting point is determined with the histogram.
You will always have both the minimum SS and the DOF you need. No errors, no surprises. Being comfortable with higher ISOs and an understanding of digital noise and how it can be minimized becomes important and quite useful with this type of exposure.
So is there anything wrong with this method? Also I can't imagine that this is an original idea.

regards~Bill

[Jeff Donald]

There's this photographer named Joe McNally, he's written a few books about photography (actually New York Times best sellers). Joe's done numerous cover stories for the last 23 years for National Geographic and American Photographer listed him as one of the 100 Most Important People in Photography. In his last book, The Hot Shoe Diaries, he has this to say:

"I am in aperture priority mode 90-plus percent of the time. It works for me because I vastly prefer to dictate to the camera the f-stop I will shoot at, rather than dictate shutter speed via shutter priority mode. I am comfortable handholding my cameras at all manner of shutter speeds, and since I am of-ten shooting with some measure of fill flash, slow speeds—in the neighborhood of 1/30th, 1/15th, etc.— don’t hold any terror for me. I’d much rather be certain of my f-stop, and the resultant depth of field I am getting, than insist on a certain shutter speed.

I am occasionally in manual exposure mode, say, when in a dark room where aperture priority will dictate to me an unreasonably long shutter speed. But, I tell ya, if you only use these camera in manual mode because, as I have heard on occasion, you “don’t trust the camera,” or you “don’t trust the meter,” then you are taking a souped-up Ferrari and driving it like the little old lady going to church on Sunday. Why do that? Use the technology! take this puppy out for a spin and see what it can do."

All the different modes have their time and place. But I agree with Artie and Joe Mcnally that if you limit yourself to just manual mode, you're missing out on what your camera can really do.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hey Jeff......last time I checked......and in no means disrespect because I consider his flash work top notch........Joe does studio type work! I'm still puzzled by limit yourself comment???......in Munual I make all the choices. I control all aspects of the image. I am not disagreeing that AV and other modes can work in situations and knowing exposure allows you to use any of them.......but you learn exposure by doing things in manual IMO. How do you understand exposure when you allow your camera to make decisions? I agree with Artie on this.....if you understand exposure.....any mode will work.....studio or not!

[Desmond Chan]

[snip] But I agree with Artie and Joe Mcnally that if you limit yourself to just manual mode

I think they're simply saying auto-mode can be a convenience. And I think not many (including those who use manual exposure mode on a regular basic) are disagreeing to that here.

you're missing out on what your camera can really do.

Care to give some examples on that??

[Charles Glatzer]

Bill,

You said "Wouldn't it be better that you didn't have to change these variables to get proper exposure? With auto you are forced to sacrifice speed for aperture or vise versa. Is there an arguement here?"
-----------------------

Both Auto Mode and Manual Mode require the same thought process to derive at the correct exposure. And, the correct exposure will be one and the same with any Priority Mode used.

For a given quantity of light and ISO you cannot alter only one variable, either the f/stop or shutter speed and maintain the same Exposure Value.

Lets assume for a given quantity of light and ISO there is one correct Exposure Value. Lets pick 1/800 for f/8, ISO 200 in bright sunlight. 1/200 @ f/16 is equivalent to 1/3200 @ f/4 and so on. The three combinations above provide the same light level hitting the capture medium. Larger lens opening requires a longer shutter-speed, and visa versa in all Priority Modes. If the light level changes and you want maintain the same f/stop and shutter speed combinations you need to change the ISO.

Metering Patterns are used to determine Exposure, Priority Modes are used to alter variables.

Chas

[Jim Neiger]

When I teach classes during my workshop, I teach the participants tyo shoot in manual mode. The first thing I tell them, is that for photographing birds in flight manual mode is almost a REQUIREMENT. The main reason for this is you very often have changing bgs when shooting BIF, and the only way to get consistantly correct exposures is in manual mode. There are other reasons as well. I will list some of them here:

1. Manual mode is much eaiser to learn, assuming your goal is to have consistantly correct exposures. The reason manual mode is easier to learn is that you don't have to predict what your camera is going to do first. Consistantly predicting what the camera is going to do is difficult, because it's a constantly changing thing.

2. You are in complete control and making all exposure decisions. This is good because you know what you are trying to accomplish and your camera doesn't. Why let it make decisions for you?

3. Manual mode increases your awareness of light and its effect on your images. This tends to make you a better photographer. If you don't understand what I mean by this, try shooting your next 20,000 frames in manual mode. When you are done you should understand what I mean.

There are many more reasons, but I'm tired and have to get up very early so I'm not going to try to list them all here.

I agree that there are situations where manual may not be the best method, but they are very few and far between. I shoot in manual over 99% of the time and my exposure hit rate is a similar percentage. I only blow exposures when I forget where I am, or I get distracted and don't pay attention. I shoot a ton of fast moving action stuff, so my need to get the correct exposure every time, and to be able to change exposure rapidly on the fly exceeds that of most photographers. Since I'm shooting a lot of flight and action, I don't get any second chances.

When I teach students manual mode and they have been used to AV mode, most leave the workshop amazed at how easy manual mode is compared to AV and also by how much improvement they see in the consistancy of their exposures. I shot in AV mode when I first started. When I started shooting manual, my photography improved dramatically and I've never felt the desire to go back to AV mode.

[Charles Glatzer]

Bill,

"Wouldn't it be better that you didn't have to change these variables to get proper exposure? With auto you are forced to sacrifice speed for aperture or vise versa. Is there an arguement here?"

Both Auto Mode and Manual Mode require the same thought process to derive at the correct exposure. And, the correct exposure will be one and the same with any Priority Mode used.

For a given quantity of light and ISO you cannot alter only one variable, either the f/stop or shutter speed and maintain the same Exposure Value.

Lets assume for a given quantity of light and ISO there is one correct Exposure Value. Lets pick 1/800 for f/8, ISO 200 in bright sunlight. 1/200 @ f/16 is equivalent to 1/3200 @ f/4 and so on. The three combinations above provide the same light level hitting the capture medium. Larger lens opening requires a longer shutter-speed, and visa versa in all Priority Modes. If the light level changes and you want maintain the same f/stop and shutter speed combinations you need to change the ISO.

Metering Patterns are used to determine Exposure.

Chas

[Charles Glatzer]

When I teach classes during my workshop, I teach the participants tyo shoot in manual mode. The first thing I tell them, is that for photographing birds in flight manual mode is almost a REQUIREMENT. The main reason for this is you very often have changing bgs when shooting BIF, and the only way to get consistantly correct exposures is in manual mode. There are other reasons as well. I will list some of them here:

1. Manual mode is much eaiser to learn, assuming your goal is to have consistantly correct exposures. The reason manual mode is easier to learn is that you don't have to predict what your camera is going to do first. Consistantly predicting what the camera is going to do is difficult, because it's a constantly changing thing.

2. You are in complete control and making all exposure decisions. This is good because you know what you are trying to accomplish and your camera doesn't. Why let it make decisions for you?

3. Manual mode increases your awareness of light and its effect on your images. This tends to make you a better photographer. If you don't understand what I mean by this, try shooting your next 20,000 frames in manual mode. When you are done you should understand what I mean.

There are many more reasons, but I'm tired and have to get up very early so I'm not going to try to list them all here.

I agree that there are situations where manual may not be the best method, but they are very few and far between. I shoot in manual over 99% of the time and my exposure hit rate is a similar percentage. I only blow exposures when I forget where I am, or I get distracted and don't pay attention. I shoot a ton of fast moving action stuff, so my need to get the correct exposure every time, and to be able to change exposure rapidly on the fly exceeds that of most photographers. Since I'm shooting a lot of flight and action, I don't get any second chances.

When I teach students manual mode and they have been used to AV mode, most leave the workshop amazed at how easy manual mode is compared to AV and also by how much improvement they see in the consistancy of their exposures. I shot in AV mode when I first started. When I started shooting manual, my photography improved dramatically and I've never felt the desire to go back to AV mode.

Jim, wink, wink!!

Best,

Chas

[Arthur Morris]

Bill,

"Wouldn't it be better that you didn't have to change these variables to get proper exposure? With auto you are forced to sacrifice speed for aperture or vise versa. Is there an arguement here?"

Both Auto Mode and Manual Mode require the same thought process to derive at the correct exposure. And, the correct exposure will be one and the same with any Priority Mode used.

For a given quantity of light and ISO you cannot alter only one variable, either the f/stop or shutter speed and maintain the same Exposure Value.

Lets assume for a given quantity of light and ISO there is one correct Exposure Value. Lets pick 1/800 for f/8, ISO 200 in bright sunlight. 1/200 @ f/16 is equivalent to 1/3200 @ f/4 and so on. The three combinations above provide the same light level hitting the capture medium. Larger lens opening requires a longer shutter-speed, and visa versa in all Priority Modes. If the light level changes and you want maintain the same f/stop and shutter speed combinations you need to change the ISO.

Metering Patterns are used to determine Exposure.

Chas

Excellent, excellent, excellent. The only that that I would add is to say that Metering Patterns are used to suggest an exposure. Competent photographers then adjust that suggested exposure to come up with the exposure that they want. I might add that with Canon I use the suggested exposure perhaps 10% of the time, adding light 80% of the time and subtracting light about 10% of the time. (This would be much different if I were using Nikon gear.)

[Roman Kurywczak]

Great stuff here.......and don't want to throw a monkey wrench into the whole conversation......"but it ain't just birds".......ever shoot a sunrise or sunset in AV mode?
Jim.......I am only in manual mode 98.9%. That doesn't mean I can't teach it......just don't see the need why!

Artie........how often do you shoot in AV? Looking at your bulletins over the years.....I don't recall that many. I can see how it would have been beneficial in the gator scenerio.....or even in changing light.....but there I still feel you can change your dials quick enough in M......but speed wise AV would be faster.

[Arthur Morris]

Roman,

re:

Great stuff here.

Agree.

.......and don't want to throw a monkey wrench into the whole conversation......"but it ain't just birds".......ever shoot a sunrise or sunset in AV mode?

Often. I find Av best for most sunrise and sunset images....

Jim.......I am only in manual mode 98.9%. That doesn't mean I can't teach it......just don't see the need why!
To save time in changing light and when unexpected conditions are encountered. Again, I will expand on that in a blog post and provide a link here.

Artie........how often do you shoot in AV?

I used to be in an auto mode 100% of the time and that was not smart. Now I work in manual about 70% of the time so I guess that I am getting smarter....

Looking at your bulletins over the years.....I don't recall that many.

There have been more than a few Av and Tv images in the past week or so :)

I can see how it would have been beneficial in the gator scenerio.....or even in changing light.....but there I still feel you can change your dials quick enough in M......but speed wise AV would be faster.

For the very last time, nobody can do 14 clicks in less than 13/100 of one second, not even you :)

[Roman Kurywczak]

Like I said......I agree I wouldn't be able to pull off that many clicks in that short of time.....but AV for landscapes? Really? How do you deal with the diffrence between the FG and sky? If you stick a GND to balance the 2 areas at sunrise or sunset.......that would kill AV.

I did notice the few different modes this week......was just speaking historically. Just letting you know that I pay attention when I read your belletin.

[Charles Glatzer]

QUOTE Roman KurywczakLike I said......I agree I wouldn't be able to pull off that many clicks in that short of time.....but AV for landscapes? Really? How do you deal with the diffrence between the FG and sky? If you stick a GND to balance the 2 areas at sunrise or sunset.......that would kill AV.

Av would work the same as Manual, as long as the scene in the viewfinder and tonal values remain fixed. Apply compensation in Av or manually change the value in Manual Mode...NO DIFFERENCE! SAME EXPOSURE, SAME END RESULT!! I am not saying it would be easier or worse, but the end result certainly would be the same. Again, Meter Pattern is used for exposure, Modes to adjust the variables.

I did notice the few different modes this week......was just speaking historically. Just letting you know that I pay attention when I read your belletin

Not really... AM throughout his career was a big proponent for Av and Eval, going more Manual the last few years (wink). But, with either method he understands Patterns and Modes, many here do not.

Chas

[Arthur Morris]

Roman, Good response by Chas :) What foreground? Most of my sunrise sunset stuff is created with various telephotos. When there is foreground stuff it is pretty close in tonality to the sky. And as far as I know they do not make split NDs for super-telephotos.

And I have been using manual mode more and more. I try to keep learning too :)

Here is a typical sunrise bird scape (actually made with a short zoom lens).

Notice Av mode :)

2008:11:22 06:31:16
24-105mm @ 24mm
Subject dist: 655m
1/100 sec, f/4
Mode: Av
Metering: Multi-segment
Exp comp: +1

[Mack Hicks]

Great discussion you all. The bottom line is that you need to know exposure, your camera, and what works best for YOU most of the time, and how to adjust when needed. I started with a Spotmatic, with match the needles metering, and you learned what to change to match the situation and the film speed.

I have gone from being primarily a shutter Tv shooter (Canon A1 days), to Av most of the time now.


Yesterday, I was shooting Easter services, going back and forth, between to vastly difference rooms. In the dark room with green wall, green stained glass and lots of dark wood, I shot mostly at f/2.8 - 3.5 with ISO 1600 - 3200. In the much smaller chapel, white walls, bright windows back lighting the subjects, that didn't work. Ended up changing to spot metering, manual, and finally pulling my flash out of my pocket for fill (chapel is much more informal), to get a few shots that looked right.

This is what I love about digital photography, I can immediately see what I need to change and am learning how to do that efficiently. These forums give me the benefit of your experience, but I have to be willing to try different styles and techniques. For me, the less variables I have to think about when I get an unexpected or even an expected opportunity, allow me to be able to more likely to get an image with sharp focus and pleasing aesthetics and correct exposure.

[Roman Kurywczak]

OK......with all due respect.....because it is water and you were going for a silhouette.... you could get away with it! Notice.....I did say with a FG........I should have said a FG where you want the detail. In most mountainscapes or landscapes with a FG.....the FG is generally 3-8 (8 for snow covered mtns.) stops different. most times.....the meter is not pointed at either the sky or the FG. Whiel technically Chas is correct.......you could do this in AV.........I do think my brain would hurt trying to figure it out......especially when I stick the split in front of the lens to balance the image. If you think it is easier in AV......by all means, go ahead and use it.......I'm thinking that I will stick to my method. One image does not make me an AV convert. I have been out in the field photographing landscapes for way to long and have seen way to many landscape pros using manual mode to see how it is easier.....but next time out I will at least try it and give you the results. Like you.....it's always fun to learn and expand ones horizons.

I will leave you with this thought......A friend of mine has a saying he is very fond of: "Even a blind squirrel will find a nut occasionally."......I think if you did more landscapes where the tonal value was usually pretty large......you might not be so fond of AV in those cases.......but it is always fun to debate!

[Arthur Morris]

Roman, With all due respect, the right exposure is the right exposure. No matter then lens, no matter the split or other ND filters in place. And certainly no matter the mode, Manual or Av or Tv or whatever.... The photographer gets to the right exposure, not the metering mode and not the mode.... In other words, nothing that you said above makes sense to me :)

I think that you are so concerned with being right, with believing that only manual mode works for you and that everyone should use it, that you are not letting your brain entertain any other possibilities. And if you read what the most-respected Chas has said above, he has said the same thing using slightly different words.....

[Charles Glatzer]

Roman,

After you put on the ND filter(s) is not the dynamic range of the overall scene compressed to hopefully within the capture medium capabilities? If not, we get to play HDR. With the tonal range compressed I believe Av would work without much problem in Eval or Matrix. I do know what you are saying....fixing the variables in camera would mean nothing would change when the filter was placed in front of the lens... darkening the sky while keeping the foreground as desired. I too prefer manual in this instance, but Av would in fact work, especially for those familiar with it.

Chas

[Roman Kurywczak]

I guess i wasn't clear enough......I did in fact say AV would work......and I was going to try it out next time out. I thought we were all aready in agreement that any mode would work if you know exposure.

I should have pointed to the Gator image quote......and which would be quicker in the case of the tonal differences one finds in many/ most landscape images. I do believe that in manual mode, it is quicker in most cases than to use AV.......but like I have reitterated above......I am going to try it out for myself.

[Steven Kersting]

In some situations manual is better. Yesterday I gave an example where Av mode would be better than manual. Here is an example where manual is better than any of the auto modes:

I was photographing a brown bear at the base of Brooks Falls, Alaska. The huge male bear was on the bank on the other side of the river under an overhanging bank with dark wet soil behind him. The day was light hazy sun with stable light, slightly diffuse (very nice light). The bear would jump into the foamy water to catch salmon. If one used any auto exposure mode when the bear made the jump, the exposure would change radically as the bear moved from a dark background to the white foamy water. The metering system would vary the exposure by many stops during the jump even though the light on the bear was constant. I metered the white water, set manual and exposure to not clip the water and could photograph the action for tens of minutes without worry that the exposure was correct. Manual works best in this situation: constant light on the subject, varying backgrounds.

As with any set of tools, one may best for a particular application, but no one tool works best for all situations. The key is selecting the best to for the particular application.

Roger

I think we agree 100% on this particular topic, but to make a point.

In the example given I might have switched to spot/center weighted metering rather than switch to manual mode. Either method could handle the situation. For me, because I have the function button set to spot metering, that switch would have been instantaneous and simple. The switch to manual mode (assuming I was not already in it) could be much more time consuming.

[Charles Glatzer]

I think we agree 100% on this particular topic, but to make a point.

In the example given I might have switched to spot/center weighted metering rather than switch to manual mode. Either method could handle the situation. For me, because I have the function button set to spot metering, that switch would have been instantaneous and simple. The switch to manual mode (assuming I was not already in it) could be much more time consuming.

In Av with spot and center you would need to keep the pattern on a constant tonal value for it to work. A wet bear is not a constant value, specular highlights and sheen off the guard hair will vary in sun and shade giving different readings.

I Know exactly where Roger was. Most times that bear jumps from the shade to sunlit water, with the bear not being in constant light. It is more about locking the exposure into the camera for where you want the subject to be at the time you depress the shutter, than where it was beforehand. Again, being Pro-Active is the key. Personally, I Spot off the white water adding 2 EV in Manual mode and get ready to rock and roll when the bear jumps in.

Chas

[Steven Kersting]

Hence my: "If you want to change the aperture in order to change the depth-of-field?" which of course means changing the look of the final image. Otherwise, there's no reason to change the aperture simply because the background has changed.

I personally don't think manual mode is better all the time under all situations. And my answer to Artie's question is, allow me to repeat myself: "No. I don't see the logic that they should."

I guess I missed the question mark. Of course to affect the scene captured. If not, and lighting is the same, then there is no reason to change anything and both methods would return the same results again.
This is the reason I use Aperture mode most of the time...The one thing that changes significantly between scenes is BG. Control over that is key. If it is not BG then I really want the lens set at it's optimal aperture. The only time I care less about aperture is when I must have a given SS for the desired result (panning blur/ freezing motion/etc).

The hardest thing for me to change on my camera is ISO..many times I 'd much rather change ISO than change SS or Aperture. In those cases I'm set to manual with ISO set to an auto range.

If it's just lighting balance, I can fix that easily by switching metering modes (fn button) or exposure comp.

[Steven Kersting]

In Av with spot and center you would need to keep the pattern on a constant tonal value for it to work. A wet bear is not a constant value, specular highlights and sheen off the guard hair will vary in sun and shade giving different readings.

I Know exactly where Roger was. Most times that bear jumps from the shade to sunlit water, with the bear not being in constant light. It is more about locking the exposure into the camera for where you want the subject to be at the time you depress the shutter, than where it was beforehand. Again, being Pro-Active is the key. Personally, I Spot off the white water adding 2 EV in Manual mode and get ready to rock and roll when the bear jumps in.

Chas

He didn't say a wet bear, and even if he had I might not have thought of it in this context (but I might had I been there). Again, it goes to camera settings...How small is the spot set to be? Why not flick into center weighted (not as easy for me as I'd have to move off of the shutter and it's a 2 finger switch)...Or go into manual.

[Desmond Chan]

He didn't say a wet bear, and even if he had I might not have thought of it in this context (but I might had I been there). Again, it goes to camera settings...How small is the spot set to be? Why not flick into center weighted (not as easy for me as I'd have to move off of the shutter and it's a 2 finger switch)...Or go into manual.

Either I'm confused or you've got something mixed up, Steven To me, one can be in auto or manual exposure with the use of center weighted average metering method. But you seem to be suggesting that they cannot exist together (switch to centered weight or go into manual?) Spot, matrix, and center-weighted average are metering methods (using the terminology in the camera manaul); the others, viz., auto-aperture priority mode, shutter priority mode, programmed mode and manual exposure mode, are, well, exposure modes The formers are how the exposure meter reads the scene, and exposure modes are whether the camera is changing the aperture, shutter speed, or ISO (depending on the modes you choose) for the photographer after reading the scene using any of the metering methods or it's the photographer who is going to do it himself.

Are you saying switch to centered weight average and left it in whatever auto exposure mode that's being used, or switch to manual exposure mode and keep the metering method at that moment??

I'm confused :2

[Steven Kersting]

I'm not arguing that manual mode is "worse", I am simply stating it is not "better" by any means. I generally recommend manual mode as a good way to learn how the exposure triangle works (I've even created a little interactive flash app based upon the sunny 16 rule to show/teach it), but it is not a substitute for learning how your camera works.

For how I work, and a large portion of the subjects I shoot, full manual doesn't work very well....when you are "sniping" people/birds/animals etc, and on the move, a subject opportunity can appear anywhere at anytime. Photos are only glimpses of time (seconds can be too long). A subject could appear on the left (backlit) or on the right (frontlit) or anywhere else. In motorsports it might be a white car, a black car, a combination, or a spectator behind me. (And yes, metering mode makes as much of a difference (more) as camera mode does in these situations.)

If things are rather stagnant, then any mode works well..

Part of the problem is "auto modes" don't work exactly how one might think, particularly if you have ISO set to an auto range.
For Aperture priority my Nikon (D3) will set a base SS of 1/1000 (regardless of lens) and adjust ISO first in order to maintain that and only change Ss once the ISO limits have been reached.
In Shutter Speed priority my camera will trade aperture first keeping base ISO until aperture limits have been reached (the opposite behavior).
Knowing this is key.
Without ISO set to a range it works as expected.

I will explain how I use the auto modes and hopefully you will see that it is *no different* than having used manual in results.

I am usually in aperture priority. In this mode I usually have my ISO set to an auto range (typically 200-800) knowing it will use ISO before it gives up the 1/1000 which is generally sufficient for most subjects/lens combinations. If it starts to trade SS due to lower light levels I have to decide if it's ok, or if I want tho change modes/ increase max ISO.
If the SS (1/1000 or resulting) is too fast/too slow I may choose to go to S (Tv) mode. In this mode it will trade aperture first, then ISO. Since I would generally prefer to control aperture over ISO. I seldom use this mode.
In the case where I must have a min/max SS (or would prefer to give SS over aperture/ISO), and I want a say about aperture, I must choose manual or a fixed/smaller auto ISO range. I will generally switch to manual over fixing the ISO. In manual I will have the ISO set to an auto range (usually larger 200-3200). To me this is still not "full manual." With these settings I choose SS and aperture (usually changing only one) and the camera adjusts for exposure.

I always have complete control over what the camera "chooses for me", in what precedence and to what extent.

Most of these decisions can be made once, for the majority of a day, based upon subject/ lens combination. Once I've made these decisions I generally only have one setting to change and often I do not have to do anything.

One thing about this whole discussion which is a little bothersome is that, regardless of what camera mode you are in, you are dependent upon the metering system (one can judge automatically +/- a couple stops EC for the scene and metering mode, but it's a best guess). For manual mode to work as well as purported one has have to have had the opportunity to take a shot and set base exposure by the results.

My camera is set up so that my thumb controls SS, my middle finger controls aperture, my ring finger changes metering mode. ISO changes require rt middle finger AND right thumb (not good w/o tripod). Exposure comp requires rt middle finger and thumb (better but still not great). I can do all of this without looking.

FWIW, when it comes to exposure my "hit rate" is well into the ninety percentile...rather lower for focus/composition/subject.

[Steven Kersting]

Either I'm confused or you've got something mixed up, Steven To me, one can be in auto or manual exposure with the use of center weighted average metering method. But you seem to be suggesting that they cannot exist together (switch to centered weight or go into manual?) Spot, matrix, and center-weighted average are metering methods (using the terminology in the camera manaul); the others, viz., auto-aperture priority mode, shutter priority mode, programmed mode and manual exposure mode, are, well, exposure modes The formers are how the exposure meter reads the scene, and exposure modes are whether the camera is changing the aperture, shutter speed, or ISO (depending on the modes you choose) for the photographer after reading the scene using any of the metering methods or it's the photographer who is going to do it himself.

Are you saying switch to centered weight average and left it in whatever auto exposure mode that's being used, or switch to manual exposure mode and keep the metering method at that moment??

I'm confused :2

I am not suggesting they cannot co-exist. But this is largely an issue of metering confusion and not a functional mode issue. To fix the problem you need to choose a different metering mode, or override it in manual (or use EC).

Yes, switch to different metering mode and leave the exposure mode the same is what I was saying. Or, you could switch to manual mode and leave the metering mode the same, or even switch to manual and change metering mode....in this case, switching metering mode would likely be the more accurate (or just as accurate) of the options.
Given the time, switching to manual, taking a test shot, and then setting exposure would be the most accurate option and would allow you to pre-frame the shot. No argument there.

[Jim Neiger]

I'm not arguing that manual mode is "worse", I am simply stating it is not "better" by any means. I generally recommend manual mode as a good way to learn how the exposure triangle works (I've even created a little interactive flash app based upon the sunny 16 rule to show/teach it), but it is not a substitute for learning how your camera works.

For how I work, and a large portion of the subjects I shoot, full manual doesn't work very well....when you are "sniping" people/birds/animals etc, and on the move, a subject opportunity can appear anywhere at anytime. Photos are only glimpses of time (seconds can be too long). A subject could appear on the left (backlit) or on the right (frontlit) or anywhere else. In motorsports it might be a white car, a black car, a combination, or a spectator behind me. (And yes, metering mode makes as much of a difference (more) as camera mode does in these situations.)

If things are rather stagnant, then any mode works well..

Part of the problem is "auto modes" don't work exactly how one might think, particularly if you have ISO set to an auto range.
For Aperture priority my Nikon (D3) will set a base SS of 1/1000 (regardless of lens) and adjust ISO first in order to maintain that and only change Ss once the ISO limits have been reached.
In Shutter Speed priority my camera will trade aperture first keeping base ISO until aperture limits have been reached (the opposite behavior).
Knowing this is key.
Without ISO set to a range it works as expected.

I will explain how I use the auto modes and hopefully you will see that it is *no different* than having used manual in results.

I am usually in aperture priority. In this mode I usually have my ISO set to an auto range (typically 200-800) knowing it will use ISO before it gives up the 1/1000 which is generally sufficient for most subjects/lens combinations. If it starts to trade SS due to lower light levels I have to decide if it's ok, or if I want tho change modes/ increase max ISO.
If the SS (1/1000 or resulting) is too fast/too slow I may choose to go to S (Tv) mode. In this mode it will trade aperture first, then ISO. Since I would generally prefer to control aperture over ISO. I seldom use this mode.
In the case where I must have a min/max SS (or would prefer to give SS over aperture/ISO), and I want a say about aperture, I must choose manual or a fixed/smaller auto ISO range. I will generally switch to manual over fixing the ISO. In manual I will have the ISO set to an auto range (usually larger 200-3200). To me this is still not "full manual." With these settings I choose SS and aperture (usually changing only one) and the camera adjusts for exposure.

I always have complete control over what the camera "chooses for me", in what precedence and to what extent.

Most of these decisions can be made once, for the majority of a day, based upon subject/ lens combination. Once I've made these decisions I generally only have one setting to change and often I do not have to do anything.

One thing about this whole discussion which is a little bothersome is that, regardless of what camera mode you are in, you are dependent upon the metering system (one can judge automatically +/- a couple stops EC for the scene and metering mode, but it's a best guess). For manual mode to work as well as purported one has have to have had the opportunity to take a shot and set base exposure by the results.

My camera is set up so that my thumb controls SS, my middle finger controls aperture, my ring finger changes metering mode. ISO changes require rt middle finger AND right thumb (not good w/o tripod). Exposure comp requires rt middle finger and thumb (better but still not great). I can do all of this without looking.

FWIW, when it comes to exposure my "hit rate" is well into the ninety percentile...rather lower for focus/composition/subject.

Steven,

I'm a bit confused by your comments. In some cases it seems you are trying to optimize things so you don't have to make a lot of adjustments on the fly and can react quickly to unpredictable opportunities, but in some of your comments it seems that you are making complex changes to settings frequently. How would you handle the following situations?

1. A bird is flying from right to left from your point of view and the sun is directly behind you. Your goal is to produce a series of images that are properly exposed for the bird. As the bird flies the bg is blue sky, then dark green dense tree, then sky again briefly, then sparse mixture of trees and sky. Please tell us what exposure mode you would choose to use and why. Also what procedure or method would you use to determine the correct exposures.

2. A white egret is flying directly towards you and the sun is behind you. The bg is a cluttered area of brush of varying tonal values. As you start to photograph the egret it is very far awary, but when you finish photographing the egret it is just about to fly over your head. What exposure mode would you use and what method would you use to arrive at the correct exposure for each of the images in the series.

I'm very interested in hearing your answers.

TIA

[Don Thompson]

I can't add any technical expertise to the discussion, but I will say that if all those who have weighed in on the subject, with all their experience and talent, can't agree then how am I as relatively new photographer, approximately 6 years, begin to figure this all out. After reading through this, I can definitely say that I am more confused than ever.

[Steven Kersting]

Steven,

I'm a bit confused by your comments. In some cases it seems you are trying to optimize things so you don't have to make a lot of adjustments on the fly and can react quickly to unpredictable opportunities, but in some of your comments it seems that you are making complex changes to settings frequently. How would you handle the following situations?

1. A bird is flying from right to left from your point of view and the sun is directly behind you. Your goal is to produce a series of images that are properly exposed for the bird. As the bird flies the bg is blue sky, then dark green dense tree, then sky again briefly, then sparse mixture of trees and sky. Please tell us what exposure mode you would choose to use and why. Also what procedure or method would you use to determine the correct exposures.

2. A white egret is flying directly towards you and the sun is behind you. The bg is a cluttered area of brush of varying tonal values. As you start to photograph the egret it is very far awary, but when you finish photographing the egret it is just about to fly over your head. What exposure mode would you use and what method would you use to arrive at the correct exposure for each of the images in the series.

I'm very interested in hearing your answers.

TIA

I can see where the confusion may lie in mentioning all of my camera settings...but not all controls are available at all times. I generally have one functional control, metering mode and EC available. EC being the least used as it requires more than one finger to change.

To answer the questions I'll make some assumptions. I am in my "default" settings of aperture priority, ISO set to auto 200-800, matrix metering, continuous high frame rate, dynamic point autofocus, continuous focus, slow (re)focus delay, and the scene is completely unexpected (i.e. I'm walking along the lakeside trail "sniping" as I often do) and of absolute minimum time (I often get shots which are available for less than 2-3 seconds total).

1. I press the FN button and switch to spot metering (diameter of spot is usually set fairly large acting "more like" center weighted) assuming I can keep the "spot" on target. If the color of the bird is not at an extreme the exposure will be correct. If the bird's color is at an extreme (bl/wh) then I would also have to use exposure compensation for optimal exposuret. Worst case, I don't get EC set, my white bird is somewhat underexposed and my black bird is somewhat overexposed both largely recoverable in post shooting RAW. Still, working at the extremes it is probably a wash and the pics will be trashed. (Had I been focused on Cormorants or Egrets I could have preset EC but I'm assuming complete surprise) I would expect 50%+ keeper ratio from this scenario assuming focus and an extreme subject color.

This is exactly how I caught my shot of a Northern Harrier...I jumped out of the truck, dropped to one knee and took the shots in less than 5 seconds total, 10 shots exposed, three shots "acceptable", and one I was happy with, none terribly off on exposure (maybe one), but many suffered from focus. (my Nikon and 300-800 are generally in the back seat mounted on my custom stock setup)

2. Initially I simply press the FN button to switch to spot mode. Assuming the spot encompasses more than just the egret the exposure will be correct. As the bird fills the spot it will become more underexposed (better than blown out) and when it begins to fill the frame release the Fn button and switch back to matrix metering, exposure is still variable but almost entirely usable/correct. Time permitting with the busy BG I would also switch the aperture to wider (typically set 2 stops down from wide open, both changes take less than 1 sec) but it is probably a mute point due to the focal distance.
In the end of the scenario I would be better off having left the aperture closer to "optimum" as the DOF will decrease sharply with the reduction of focal distance.

In these cases what we are talking about are issues with metering and not as much "scene". To me "scene" means subject vs BG and motion vs stationary. In both scenarios my SS will remain at 1/1000 (sufficient for most motion and handholding at 800mm) and my aperture will be close to optimum (unless changed). In both cases I will have some shots exposed better than others, but almost none unusable. In both cases my ISO changed quite a bit (within set limits) and perhaps my SS also changed (as white/ black became prominent).
In both cases I am "giving" on ISO first, an area I have room to not care so much.

In both cases I do not believe you could do any better (consistently) in manual mode. Even given the time to pre expose for the light and average exposure (a luxury I did not allow myself) an entirely white or black bird will require significant compensation and a "best guess" as to meter offset. In most cases the "best guess" will be further off at the extremes. (I'm guessing about 6 clicks on SS or 2-3 clicks on aperture depending upon settings just to get close.) In fact, I would bet the average individual would do much worse in manual mode.
Given better conditions, the averages become much more equal....and given good enough conditions, proper exposure becomes a non-issue (regardless of how you get there). If you say you can do better in worst case scenario and full manual, I would first have to see it, then I would bow down....I know *I* cannot do better on full manual and it's not for a lack of understanding or experience....In full manual I would assume you would have to give on SS or aperture first, both areas I care more about than ISO. But just to pull it off would be a feat...

I put both of these scenarios in the absolute worst case because a. it takes things to the extreme, and b. because it's often how I work, not having the time/patience (more time related) to sit stationary for many hours at a time. Often, just setting up a tripod is a luxury.

[Steven Kersting]

I can't add any technical expertise to the discussion, but I will say that if all those who have weighed in on the subject, with all their experience and talent, can't agree then how am I as relatively new photographer, approximately 6 years, begin to figure this all out. After reading through this, I can definitely say that I am more confused than ever.

It's simple really...get the correct exposure, regardless of "how". There really isn't anything to "figure out". If you do not understand the basic exposure triangle, learn that and move on. Ignore us, because it really doesn't matter.

[Roger Clark]

Steven,

Here is the bear image I was discussing. You can see the background is very dark. The problem with relying on spot mode is then you are stuck needing to keep the center spot on the thing you need to meter. I prefer to get the best composition. I move the AF point around to keep the composition I want and the AF point on the eye. For the image here, the AF point was on the eye. With manual mode I could not only photograph this bear, but many others as they fished the river. I checked exposure by checking the reading on the white water every 20 minutes or so, and in between did not have to change or check anything. All exposures came out superb.

[Roger Clark]

Roman,

I do a lot of landscapes too and sometimes I am in Av mode and go with it. Like it has been said, the meter is a suggestion. So if I set up and happen to be in Av mode (which I usually am while hiking because the light is changing), I'll check the exposure, maybe add/subtract compensation and make a test image to check the histogram. No different if I am in manual. When one has lots of time, I don't see the difference with any mode, as the meter is just a first suggestion, and as Artie says, one gets to the right exposure. If Av mode needs more compensation than the camera allows, I'll switch to manual.

When I do multi-frame panoramas, I zoom in and spot meter various things in the scene, decide on an overall best exposure, then for to manual and start the mosaic.

Roger

[Arthur Morris]

I can't add any technical expertise to the discussion, but I will say that if all those who have weighed in on the subject, with all their experience and talent, can't agree then how am I as relatively new photographer, approximately 6 years, begin to figure this all out. After reading through this, I can definitely say that I am more confused than ever.

Don, I will post a link to a future blog post here that will simplify things (as I see them). Over the years I have done a pretty decent job of simplifying and explaining things....

[Arthur Morris]

Steven, Jim's Neiger's comments in Pane 90 are 100% correct. When working with a given subject and backgrounds of varying tonalities working in Manual mode is the way to go. For everyone. It is fast and simple.... Without exception.

Furthermore, you comments in Pane 91 (which include, "assuming I can keep the "spot" on target," "Initially I simply press the FN button to switch to spot mode. Assuming the spot encompasses more than just the egret the exposure will be correct. As the bird fills the spot it will become more underexposed (better than blown out) and when it begins to fill the frame release the Fn button and switch back to matrix metering, exposure is still variable but almost entirely usable/correct. Time permitting with the busy BG I would also switch the aperture to wider (typically set 2 stops down from wide open, both changes take less than 1 sec) but it is probably a mute point due to the focal distance," and "In both cases I do not believe you could do any better (consistently) in manual mode" all point to a method that is convoluted, exceedingly complex, and at best, fraught with inaccuracy. And you last statement is not at all correct: working in Manual mode as Jim describes will give you a perfect exposure for every frame regardless of the tonality of the bird, its size in the frame, or the changing tonality of the subject. By your own admission your method often does not yield a perfect exposure....

You talk about making changes over a second or over several seconds. The best flight poses/light angles are often available only for a fraction of a single second.....

Lastly, I have--as far back as the ABP advised against spot-metering for avian subjects.

[Don Thompson]

Don, I will post a link to a future blog post here that will simplify things (as I see them). Over the years I have done a pretty decent job of simplifying and explaining things....

Artie, I look forward to your post and hope you can explain it so I have a better understanding of not only what people are saying here, but when I should use manual mode or one of the other modes.

[Roman Kurywczak]

So Roger,
How often would you say you are in AV mode? What percentage of the time? I ask because I want to respond to Don's confusion above also.....but will await your reply.

[Don Thompson]

Artie, I look forward to your post and hope you can explain it so I have a better understanding of not only what people are saying here, but when I should use manual mode or one of the other modes.

Without waiting for Artie's post or Roman's comment I will add, that I am skeptical of ANY approach being correct 100% of the time, regardless of the topic. Doing something the same way 100% of the time seems to be stubborn and an unwillingness to accept that there might on occasion be a better approach to reach your goal.