Av mode

punkuate

punkuate

Messages
285
Name
Spiderman
Edit My Images
No
After seeing the results of the poll on the other thread, I was actually a bit shocked to find that most people shoot in Av, so... what's the big deal?

I mostly shoot models, and have never used anything other than Manual settings. So what are the pros and cons and what situations are good for using Av rather than manual?

Very basic question, I know, but I have never bothered with any other camera settings.
 
I think it's just convenience. Just setting the aperture (and occasionally the ISO) every time you take a photo, versus having to set the shutter speed, aperture and occasionally ISO every time is a lot less time consuming. Sure, manual gives you more control and creativity, but I'm sure people do switch to manual when the time arises. But otherwise Av mode will suffice.

And unless you're shooting sports or things like animals in action, I don't think shutter speed matters as much to most people, hence Av being top.
 
I shoot manual because that's what I grew up shooting but I do find AV quick and handy for shooting the birds.

I'll pick my aperture and stick with it - as the light changes I keep an eye on the shutter speed the camera is giving me and if it drops too slow then all I have to bother about is upping the ISO to regain some shutter speed.
 
Last edited:
I use Av primarily as it saves me time when I don't have time to think about what settings I need to use, most of the time it works but the camera can get it wrong on occasions. For landscape shots and arkward lighting conditions I always use manual.
 
Right, I'm going to say it and wait for the backlash... isn't it like cheating? *hides*
 
AV is good when you have constant light changes, e.g. sunny but cloudy day, one minute the sun is out the next it's behind a cloud. Still a creative mode IMHO as you can choose the apperture and therefor the DOF. Saves a lot of peeing about when under pressure too. Learnt that the hard way thinking Manual mode was the only way, and did too much thumbling around when I first took on some wedding shoots. Still use Manual for some shots though. Also know some togs who use P mode and adjust EC as they go.
 
I think it really goes down to what you shot, if you have time to set up the shot and have a continues source of light manual is fine, if the light is changing about and shooting sports for example AV will be a lot quicker for shots and a lot easier.

But then again AV would work fine in both of these situations so i think it depends on the shooter and what your after.
 
punkuate said:
I mostly shoot models, and have never used anything other than Manual settings..
Click to expand...

Theres your answer... Norrow minded :)

Come to a sports event or something outside where you only have time x to time y to get z amount of shots... its a sunny , cloudy, windy day... the light is changing every couple of seconds.... You would be knackered in manual mode...

I use manual only for all indoor work.. for night time work and for daytime work other than the above scenario..Much prefer manual in most situations..

Only a complete and utter idiot would advocate using manual only all the time.. same idiot who would say you should only use one shot mode... all these things are on your camera for a reason... :)




ADDYONBIT.... Two equal explanations posted while I was typing :)

.
 
punkuate said:
Right, I'm going to say it and wait for the backlash... isn't it like cheating? *hides*
Click to expand...

Thats kind of what i think after i learnt manual, but i think sometime i would get more shots from using AV then manual as in manual i would still be changing the shutter or aperture for the correct exposure.

Something i need to get out of the habit of i think.
 
KIPAX said:
Only a complete and utter idiot would advocate using manual only all the time.. same idiot who would say you should only use one shot mode... all these things are on your camera for a reason... :)
.
Click to expand...

amen......
 
KIPAX said:
theer speaketh someone who doesn't understand cameras.. manual user or not...
Click to expand...


Bit harsh - but fair! :D

People expound shooting in Manual mode like it's some badge of honour. It's just another mode which has advantages at certain times.
 
I don't understand what the big deal is with shooting manual? Surely it gives you no more control than shooting av or tv and applying exposure compensation? Ok, so admittedly my experience is very limited, but every time i have ventured into manual it feels like Im just setting something extra for the sake of it? I still use the same light meter to judge my shutter speed as the camera would have used in av mode?
 
I use AV because I like the DoF to be my overriding factor - shutter speeds, providing they allow me to get the shot, are irrelevant to me a lot of the time.....
 
KIPAX said:
Theres your answer... Norrow minded :)
Click to expand...

Not really, I'm asking so I can try it in suitable situations.

I suppose I'm a bit stuck in my ways, just because it's been the only way that I've learned... hence the thread.

I am slightly wary about handing some control over to a camera incase it makes the wrong decision, I suppose.
 
beefweasel said:
I don't understand what the big deal is with shooting manual? Surely it gives you no more control than shooting av or tv and applying exposure compensation? Ok, so admittedly my experience is very limited, but every time i have ventured into manual it feels like Im just setting something extra for the sake of it? I still use the same light meter to judge my shutter speed as the camera would have used in av mode?
Click to expand...
Say you have a situation where you're photographing a back lit person. Setting manual mode enables you to move in close filling the frame with your subject's face and balance the meter for that exposure. Now move back and take your shots ignoring the fact that the meter will now be indicating the wrong exposure.

As long as the light doesn't change you can now take as many shots as you like from that position. Sometimes Manual mode has advantages, sometimes it's a waste of effort. I shoot in AV most of the time.
 
Last edited:
punkuate said:
Not really, I'm asking so I can try it in suitable situations.

I suppose I'm a bit stuck in my ways, just because it's been the only way that I've learned... hence the thread.

I am slightly wary about handing some control over to a camera incase it makes the wrong decision, I suppose.
Click to expand...

Unless you are using an incidental light meter, then you are letting the camera make the decision anyway.
 
punkuate said:
I am slightly wary about handing some control over to a camera incase it makes the wrong decision, I suppose.
Click to expand...

You still dont get it do you... Sorry but you simply dont... its not a case of manual or av ..whichones best? its a case of both ...it depends on the situation.. you mostly shoot one type of photogrpahy so thinking one thing.. hence the narrow mind (or is it tunnel vision?)

You have to consider the possibility that EVERYONE AGREES WITH YOU and we would all rather make the decisions than hand over to the camera.. however you ahve been give examples where manual would be no use at all to you... so its not a matter of handing it over to the camera that might make mistakes (BTW you might make mistakes as well) your handing it over to the camera that can change settings quicker in AV than you can in manual..because the light would be changing so quick...

Using manual is daft in some scenarios as given above... a manual user isnt betetr than an av user.... a person who uses manual, av and other modes is the clever photogrpaher.. using all the cameras options to get the best pic given the conditions.. someone who only uses manual isn't understanding the camera or how to use it... which is the oposite of what they think they are doing:)
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
You still dont get it do you... Sorry but you simply dont... its not a case of manual or av ..whichones best? its a case of both ...it depends on the situation.. you mostly shoot one type of photogrpahy so thinking one thing.. hence the narrow mind (or is it tunnel vision?)

You have to consider the possibility that EVERYONE AGREES WITH YOU and we would all rather make the decisions than hand over to the camera.. however you ahve been give examples where manual would be no use at all to you... so its not a matter of handing it over to the camera that might make mistakes (BTW you might make mistakes as well) your handing it over to the camera that can change settings quicker in AV than you can in manual..because the light would be changing so quick...

Using manual is daft in some scenarios as given above... a manual user isnt betetr than an av user.... a person who uses manual, av and other modes is the clever photogrpaher.. using all the cameras options to get the best pic given the conditions.. someone who only uses manual isn't understanding the camera or how to use it... which is the oposite of what they think they are doing:)
Click to expand...

That's a bit uncalled for since I am trying to find out when/why I would use it in model work. I didn't claim to be more smart than someone who used Av because I use manual, I used manual because that was how I learned, and I am now looking at using other settings that I've not really tried in the appropriate situations. I'm also not asking which is best, I'm asking when I would need to use it.

I have a shoot on Sunday that's location based (not something I do often), so am I right thinking this would be a good opportunity to try it?
 
punkuate said:
That's a bit uncalled for since I am trying to find out when/why I would use it in model work. I didn't claim to be more smart than someone who used Av because I use manual, I used manual because that was how I learned, and I am now looking at using other settings that I've not really tried in the appropriate situations. I'm also not asking which is best, I'm asking when I would need to use it.

I have a shoot on Sunday that's location based (not something I do often), so am I right thinking this would be a good opportunity to try it?
Click to expand...

Like me you grew up shooting manual. Manual gives you everything you could ever want but might not be as quick. That's all. End of. :thumbs:

There are however other modes which 'help'. The following example works for me with the birds.....

dinners said:
I shoot manual because that's what I grew up shooting but I do find AV quick and handy for shooting the birds.

I'll pick my aperture and stick with it - as the light changes I keep an eye on the shutter speed the camera is giving me and if it drops too slow then all I have to bother about is upping the ISO to regain some shutter speed.
Click to expand...

AV (or any 'mode' for that matter) is a helping hand which if done correctly = the right combination of aperture / shutter / ISO that 'Manual' will give you.

At the end of the day - use all or any of the available settings in the way that best suits your subject and the way you've been brought up. It's what you feel comfortable with. :thumbs:
 
Also, I very rarely use continuous light or available light, most of the stuff I do is strobes or flashguns so I generally ignore my cameras metering.

But on Sunday I'm hoping to use only natural light, outdoors so I'll see what it does. :)
 
punkuate said:
Also, I very rarely use continuous light or available light, most of the stuff I do is strobes or flashguns
Click to expand...

.......which to me sounds like AV is the last thing you're bothered about as the shutter speed is the key.
 
Last edited:
punkuate said:
That's a bit uncalled for since I am trying to find out when/why I would use it in model work. I didn't claim to be more smart than someone who used Av because I use manual, I used manual because that was how I learned, and I am now looking at using other settings that I've not really tried in the appropriate situations. I'm also not asking which is best, I'm asking when I would need to use it.

I have a shoot on Sunday that's location based (not something I do often), so am I right thinking this would be a good opportunity to try it?
Click to expand...

Think of manual as Set & Lock mode, and maybe that explains when to use it? If all you are doing in manual is lining up the meter needle by hand, instead of letting the camera do it for you, then manual is pointless.

And the exposure you get is obviously the same whichever mode you use, assuming you interpret it correctly, and you can get any combination of settings in any mode, if that's what you want (using program shift, compensation, whatever). It's just a question of using whichever mode suits you, and the situation, best.

Personally, my default mode is Av, and M for studio. I think that's quite typical, but there are no rules.

I think that newcomers usually start off with one of the auto modes, then get into manual as some kind of initiation ceremony, then when they've discovered they get the same results but it takes more time, they go back to Av ;)
 
HoppyUK said:
If all you are doing in manual is lining up the meter needle by hand, instead of letting the camera do it for you, then manual is pointless.
Click to expand...

I don't even look at the meter. I don't think I've taken one photo that it was in the middle when I pressed the button. :(
 
Aperture priority is simply a time saving device. Most of the time if I was using manual I'd be following the camera's meter to get the correct exposore, so I might aswell just use Aperture Priority.

If you are using studio lights/strobes etc, then perhaps manual is your best bet, as you've already been doing - Av won't add anything, it'll only take away (most of) the ability to control the shutter speed.
 
The whole AV / TV vs Manual debate does amuse me, especially when it is said that Manual will give me more control! Contrary to popular belief, AV or TV doesn't actually let the camera take over, it gives you an essential tool to help you take the picture.

When setting up a shot in Manual, you have to start putting in the settings - do you put in the aperture first, or the shutter first, or the ISO first? Which ever comes first haven't you already prioritised a setting anyway, despite being in manual?

For me AV/TV does exactly the same, and saves you having to spend time fiddling with an extra button to achieve pretty much the same thing - a decent exposure. That said, manual has it's place for the trickier and perhaps more specialist shots and it's an essential 'mode' we couldn't be without.

The most important bit, is to understand how exposure works, and what all these numbers mean - it's a balancing game, and most modes will achieve it.
 
KIPAX said:
there should not be a debate which is best.... photogrpahers should use them all depending on the circumstances...
Click to expand...

:plusone:

But then photographers have to know what M, A (Av) and S (Tv) actually do.

In manual the settings will not be affected if the subject changes ( a Black dog replaced by a White dog for example ) which is good, however if the light changes then you have to change your settings to suit.

In A or S the settings will change if the subject changes which is not good and you have to compensate but the settings also change as the light changes which is good.
 
Suvv said:
:plusone:

But then photographers have to know what M, A (Av) and S (Tv) actually do.

In manual the settings will not be affected if the subject changes ( a Black dog replaced by a White dog for example ) which is good
Click to expand...

How is that good Kev? If you've metered for a black dog which is suddenly replaced by a white dog - you'd be looking at massive over-exposure with the white dog shot.
In A or S the settings will change if the subject changes which is not good and you have to compensate but the settings also change as the light changes which is good.
Click to expand...

It's good whether the subject changes or the light changes. Those are exactly the advantages of using AV or TV - the camera metering will change settings to take account of either situation. You just need to be aware of when you need to compensate - but that is true whatever mode you shoot in - including manual.
 
CT said:
How is that good Kev? If you've metered for a black dog which is suddenly replaced by a white dog - you'd be looking at massive over-exposure with the white dog shot.

OK, imagine that there are 3 dogs. A black dog, a white dog and an 18% grey dog :)
If you have the camera on manual, meter the grey dog and have the camera meter centred (ie No compensation) you will get a correctly exposed grey dog.
If you now replace the grey dog with the black one the camera meter will show underexposure as less light is being reflected but you ignore it and you will get a correctly exposed black dog.
If you now replace the black dog with the white one the meter will show overexposure as more light is being reflected but again you ignore it and you will get a correctly exposed white dog.


It's good whether the subject changes or the light changes. Those are exactly the advantages of using AV or TV - the camera metering will change settings to take account of either situation. You just need to be aware of when you need to compensate - but that is true whatever mode you shoot in - including manual.

My comments above should show why Av or Tv on their own are not suitable when the subject changes. As you have said you have to compensate whenever the subject is lighter or darker than 18% grey.

Another example is taking a picture of a swan on dark water. At a certain distance away the swan and the water will average out to 18% grey and you will get a correctly exposed shot.
As the swan comes closer it reflects more light into the camera and on Av or Tv the exposure will be reduced giving a grey swan.
If the swan goes further away the dark water will be dominant and on Av or Tv the exposure will be increased giving a blown out swan.
All the above assumes No compensation.

In manual you would not have to worry about how far away the swan was, once you have the correct settings you will always get a correctly exposed swan.

A second good example is a bird in flight, if you have the correct exposure for the lighting and are in manual then the bird will be correctly exposed regardless of the background.
In Av or Tv however the exposure will be changing all the time as the background changed from clear bright sky to clouds to trees to the ground. All those changes would give an incorrectly exposed bird, unless you could dial in the correct compensation as you were tracking the bird.
Click to expand...
 
OK, imagine that there are 3 dogs. A black dog, a white dog and an 18% grey dog :)
If you have the camera on manual, meter the grey dog and have the camera meter centred (ie No compensation) you will get a correctly exposed grey dog.
If you now replace the grey dog with the black one the camera meter will show underexposure as less light is being reflected but you ignore it and you will get a correctly exposed black dog.
If you now replace the black dog with the white one the meter will show overexposure as more light is being reflected but again you ignore it and you will get a correctly exposed white dog.

Well it's better - but you've now introduced a handy 18% grey dog which is different to your original post. :D It's not quite right still.

An 18% grey card reading is not a panacea for all situations. The idea of an 18% grey card reading is that it gives a good exposure for the tones in an 'average' scene. It's up to us to assess what that average scene is. The scene may well be average in most respects but with very dark or very light tones in the scene which occupy so little of the scene that they're of little consequence. To compensate for those small light or dark areas would be to the detriment of the overall shot - so we're safe to go with the grey card reading and no adjustment.

It's a different matter though when that dark or light area forms the main subject of the shot - and white or black are two extremes which would result in under-exposure for the black dog, and over-exposure of the white dog if you relied completely on an 18% grey card reading.

I'm not disagreeing essentially with any of the second part of your post - there are are occasions when Manual is an advantage - as I and others have said earlier.




 
CT said:
OK, imagine that there are 3 dogs. A black dog, a white dog and an 18% grey dog :)
If you have the camera on manual, meter the grey dog and have the camera meter centred (ie No compensation) you will get a correctly exposed grey dog.
If you now replace the grey dog with the black one the camera meter will show underexposure as less light is being reflected but you ignore it and you will get a correctly exposed black dog.
If you now replace the black dog with the white one the meter will show overexposure as more light is being reflected but again you ignore it and you will get a correctly exposed white dog.

Well it's better - but you've now introduced a handy 18% grey dog which is different to your original post. :D It's not quite right still.

An 18% grey card reading is not a panacea for all situations. The idea of an 18% grey card reading is that it gives a good exposure for the tones in an 'average' scene. It's up to us to assess what that average scene is. The scene may well be average in most respects but with very dark or very light tones in the scene which occupy so little of the scene that they're of little consequence. To compensate for those small light or dark areas would be to the detriment of the overall shot - so we're safe to go with the grey card reading and no adjustment.

It's a different matter though when that dark or light area forms the main subject of the shot - and white or black are two extremes which would result in under-exposure for the black dog, and over-exposure of the white dog if you relied completely on an 18% grey card reading.

I'm not disagreeing essentially with any of the second part of your post - there are are occasions when Manual is an advantage - as I and others have said earlier.
Click to expand...

I can't see where introducing a grey dog is different from my original post. I am just trying to point out that the correct exposure should be based on the light not the subject.

Perhaps we are disagreeing because I am not spelling out all the assumptions I have made in the original post.
I should have said that if you take into account the lighting, your metering mode, the reflectivity of the dog etc. and then set your manual exposure to take account of all these so that the black dog comes out as black as it should be then there is no need to change exposure for the white dog shot.

Putting it another way, if I took an incident light reading I would not consider the subject at all, I would just use that reading to set exposure.
You seem to be saying that even with an incident light reading I should be adjusting the exposure if a dark or light area forms the main subject of the shot.

FWIW I use A for walkabout and for many of my shots outside as I want to control DoF and I am happy to let the camera choose the shutter speed.
I use manual for bird in flight shots as explained earlier.
 
Last edited:
Suvv said:
Putting it another way, if I took an incident light reading I would not consider the subject at all, I would just use that reading to set exposure.
You seem to be saying that even with an incident light reading I should be adjusting the exposure if a dark or light area forms the main subject of the shot.

.
Click to expand...

Absolutely that's what I'm saying Kev. An incident reading works much the same as a grey card reading except a grey card reading is reflected whereas an incident reading is taken from the light falling upon the subject. That white transluscent incident dome just filters the light to allow 18% of the light through to be read by the meter. Yoiu still need to make adjustment if the main subject of your shot is particularly dark or light.
 
CT said:
Absolutely that's what I'm saying Kev. An incident reading works much the same as a grey card reading except a grey card reading is reflected whereas an incident reading is taken from the light falling upon the subject. That white transluscent incident dome just filters the light to allow 18% of the light through to be read by the meter. Yoiu still need to make adjustment if the main subject of your shot is particularly dark or light.
Click to expand...

Right, now I thought that a grey card reading, or an incident light reading, was a definite exposure reading, to be used without compensation. (apart from the fact that an incident light reading does not tell you much about the shadows as no light falls there)

I have checked some of my books on the subject - including "The Ilford Manual of Photography" and "The Complete Photographer" by Andreas Feininger, both over 30 years old :), and found that I was wrong.
I must have had it right at some point in the past because I did have doubts which is why I have kept going on about it in this post.
I assume that getting blasted by 18% grey cards advice all the time has led me astray.

Thanks for that CT :D
 
Suvv said:
Right, now I thought that a grey card reading, or an incident light reading, was a definite exposure reading, to be used without compensation. (apart from the fact that an incident light reading does not tell you much about the shadows as no light falls there)

I have checked some of my books on the subject - including "The Ilford Manual of Photography" and "The Complete Photographer" by Andreas Feininger, both over 30 years old :), and found that I was wrong.
I must have had it right at some point in the past because I did have doubts which is why I have kept going on about it in this post.
I assume that getting blasted by 18% grey cards advice all the time has led me astray.

Thanks for that CT :D
Click to expand...

LOL. Well that's great Kev. :thumbs:

All this theory is great and it's nice to have a good understanding, but with modern evaluative/ matrix metering systems they get you there in most situations especially with the preview screen and the histogram. They can still be 'fooled' of course, but so can any other method of metering, or rather we can be fooled in interpreting the readings.
 
specialman said:
I use AV because I like the DoF to be my overriding factor - shutter speeds, providing they allow me to get the shot, are irrelevant to me a lot of the time.....
Click to expand...

I'll find out tomorrow when shooting hunting eagles. Had a lot of bu**ering about today at WWT Welney as I shot in S to stop the bird motion in high wind (and help prevent camera shake - 300f4 no VR) but the DoF was too far out on lots of the shots. Whether it was me picking the wring point of focus, I'll find out later in my monitor when I whittle them down.

Question - should I just pick f5.6-f8 and let the shutter sort itself out? If I leave ISO at Auto with an 800 top limit I hope this should do. Weather is due to be intermittent sunny/cloud
 
RubyX4 said:
I'll find out tomorrow when shooting hunting eagles. Had a lot of bu**ering about today at WWT Welney as I shot in S to stop the bird motion in high wind (and help prevent camera shake - 300f4 no VR) but the DoF was too far out on lots of the shots. Whether it was me picking the wring point of focus, I'll find out later in my monitor when I whittle them down.

Question - should I just pick f5.6-f8 and let the shutter sort itself out? If I leave ISO at Auto with an 800 top limit I hope this should do. Weather is due to be intermittent sunny/cloud
Click to expand...

In general, what I shoot (angling) doesn't really require fast shutters other than when doing casting shots but to be on the safe side, especially when it comes to having maximum DoF at any given situation, I usually look for a worse case exposure setting that is then my base for the day. I know the capabilities of my camera and up to ISO 1000 it's fine so more often than not, I'll set it at a higher ISO so I get fast shutters and narrow apertures. This then means I have a lot of leeway to play with and if light levels improve, I can drop the ISO down.

The only thing I do have to be mindful of is FP sync and the loss of power than comes with trying to sync faster than 1/250th, where it can be as much as three stops of flash power lost as a result. that's the only time I start to look at shutter speeds and in that scenario, I drop the ISO right down because i usually want shallow DoF as well. Of course, for bird stuff i doubt flash is going to be that much of a problem for you.....

What you're suggesting about using Auto ISO (but setting a high ISO 'ceiling') sounds a good plan. I'd just do what I normally do; look at how bad the light could get and what shutter speed/aperture combo you'll need to freeze action AND get a good DoF and then you can work from there. I've had a look at a few samples of D5000 high ISO and TBH, I actually wouldn't mind pushing it to ISO 1600 if I were you... if it means getting a shot that's not going to happen at lower ISOs then personally, I'd suffer a bit of extra noise. :)
 
Last edited:
specialman said:
In general, what I shoot (angling) doesn't really require fast shutters other than when doing casting shots but to be on the safe side, especially when it comes to having maximum DoF at any given situation, I usually look for a worse case exposure setting that is then my base for the day. I know the capabilities of my camera and up to ISO 1000 it's fine so more often than not, I'll set it at a higher ISO so I get fast shutters and narrow apertures. This then means I have a lot of leeway to play with and if light levels improve, I can drop the ISO down.

The only thing I do have to be mindful of is FP sync and the loss of power than comes with trying to sync faster than 1/250th, where it can be as much as three stops of flash power lost as a result. that's the only time I start to look at shutter speeds and in that scenario, I drop the ISO right down because i usually want shallow DoF as well. Of course, for bird stuff i doubt flash is going to be that much of a problem for you.....

What you're suggesting about using Auto ISO (but setting a high ISO 'ceiling') sounds a good plan. I'd just do what I normally do; look at how bad the light could get and what shutter speed/aperture combo you'll need to freeze action AND get a good DoF and then you can work from there. I've had a look at a few samples of D5000 high ISO and TBH, I actually wouldn't mind pushing it to ISO 1600 if I were you... if it means getting a shot that's not going to happen at lower ISOs then personally, I'd suffer a bit of extra noise. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for that Pat - uploads will have to wait till next weekend as my card reader just died so I can't even tx the photos of the Welney flamingo. Grrr :bang:
 
Just an update to say I tried using it a bit today and it is easier, and the results are the same once you work out the compensation, I think I'll use it whenever I'm outdoors from now on. :) thanks people :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top