Exposure compensation vs Manual Mode

simon ess said:
Exactly! Cheating, that's all it is.

I prefer the Father Ted focusing on my XA-2.

Near, far, father. farther.
Click to expand...

My 1908 Kodak had a short focusing scale, you best-guessed the distance and job done - THAT's Manual focusing :)

It also had 4 apertures - 1, 2, 3 & 4 and two shutter speeds, on a sunny day none of them seemed to make any difference to either exposure nor DoF - proper Manual camera :)

Dave
 
Happens automatically...
 
Perfeshernull, innit.
 
DG Phototraining said:
My 1908 Kodak had a short focusing scale, you best-guessed the distance and job done - THAT's Manual focusing :)

It also had 4 apertures - 1, 2, 3 & 4 and two shutter speeds, on a sunny day none of them seemed to make any difference to either exposure nor DoF - proper Manual camera :)

Dave
Click to expand...
Focusing scale? You were lucky! I used to DREAM of having a focusing scale. :D
 
Mr Badger said:
That's right! So no-one with a mirrorless camera can call themselves a proper photographer. And on that bombshell...

;)
Click to expand...
By that thinking no one who uses digital cameras are ‘proper’ photographers compared to film photographers as you can see the result straight away unlike film and make adjustments to exposure, focus etc. I’m sure we can do the same with film photography (35mm film isn’t real photography compared to wet plate film). Where does it stop?
 
rob-nikon said:
By that thinking no one who uses digital cameras are ‘proper’ photographers compared to film photographers as you can see the result straight away unlike film and make adjustments to exposure, focus etc. I’m sure we can do the same with film photography (35mm film isn’t real photography compared to wet plate film). Where does it stop?
Click to expand...
Exactly! Just to make it clear, it's not my thinking at all. I was just cocking a bit of a snook at those that think you've got to shoot in full manual to be a 'proper photographer'. To me it doesn't matter if I'm using a Box Brownie, a fully manual 1950s folding camera, a 1960s fully manual 35mm SLR with uncoupled match-needle type light meter, a 1990s 35mm SLR with multi-zone metering 7 frames per second and eye-controlled focus, or a modern full-frame or crop sensor DSLR, as long as I'm enjoying the experience.

To me, that's what my hobby is about - having fun! Now, if I'm achieving that by choosing the right ISO film to suit the prevailing lighting conditions (about the only exposure control you have with a 1924 Kodak Box Brownie), or relying on a multi-zone TTL metering system AF SLR in 'P' mode, what the heck, as long as I can get the results I want and repeat this trick when necessary (and understand why I can achieve this... or why I couldn't). To me, it doesn't matter a jot whether it was the camera or me that chose f/8 at 1/125 second. :)
 
Last edited:
simon ess said:
Why anyone would use manual, except very occasionally, or for specific tonal manipulation of a scene, is beyond me.

But each to their own.
Click to expand...
Because unless you are photographing a scene that is 18% grey any form of automation gives the wrong exposure.

However if you are knowledgeable about photography you know that manual can give the corrrect exposure regardless of if the scene is 18% grey or not.

I did say knowledgeable. ;)
 
shapeshifter said:
Because unless you are photographing a scene that is 18% grey any form of automation gives the wrong exposure.

However if you are knowledgeable about photography you know that manual can give the corrrect exposure regardless of if the scene is 18% grey or not.

I did say knowledgeable. ;)
Click to expand...

Thing is, if you are indeed knowledgeable about photography, you know that you can also obtain the same 'correct' exposure using a 'semi-auto' mode (Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority, Manual with Auto ISO) and exposure compensation - that's the purpose of exposure compensation after all, to provide an adjustment to the automatically calculated exposure value based on the photographers knowledge and experience.
 
shapeshifter said:
Because unless you are photographing a scene that is 18% grey any form of automation gives the wrong exposure.

However if you are knowledgeable about photography you know that manual can give the corrrect exposure regardless of if the scene is 18% grey or not.

I did say knowledgeable. ;)
Click to expand...
Hahahahah
Hilarious.
If I’m shooting AV and using exp comp I’m deciding the exposure.
If I’m shooting M and slavishly zeroing the meter; the camera is in control but using me as it’s mechanism.

Your ‘knowledgeable’ didn’t take account of the small amount of extra knowledge it takes to use automation to our advantage.
 
shapeshifter said:
Because unless you are photographing a scene that is 18% grey any form of automation gives the wrong exposure.

However if you are knowledgeable about photography you know that manual can give the corrrect exposure regardless of if the scene is 18% grey or not.

I did say knowledgeable. ;)
Click to expand...
Many decades ago, light meters were calibrated to around 18% grey but not in 2020. The TTL exposure systems in modern cameras are far more sophisticated and take the type of image into account.
 
I've never understood the idea that somehow getting a camera for it to tell you what settings to make then having to click a couple of wheels to get to these settings is somehow more "pure" than any other exposure modes.

There are occasions when "M" mode is more practical and will help you get a shot with less effort and there are times when either "A" or "T" will do the same.

I sometimes use a light or flash meter, but it isn't because it's more esoteric, it's just so I can get a better starting place and it's the easiest way to get predictable results, in situations for eg flash % etc or when exposure is problematic. So it's a question of practicality and ease of use rather than philosophy. Even with my example of flash % it's a matter of taste and you tweak it by eye to suit circumstance and produce the effect you want.
 
john.margetts said:
Many decades ago, light meters were calibrated to around 18% grey but not in 2020. The TTL exposure systems in modern cameras are far more sophisticated and take the type of image into account.
Click to expand...
FWIW, that's only true if you use some form of smart metering (Matrix/Evaluative/etc). Spot and CW metering are still solely based on middle grey; and so is the ISO standard.

18% grey originated for printing... it was used to ensure the enlarger was printing at the correct density and w/o a color cast. Using an 18% grey card directly for exposure results in ~ 1/2 stop underexposure; but holding the card at a 45* angle to the meter reduces its' reflectivity to ~ 12% and results in a better exposure... or just use a 12% grey card.

But there never has been an absolute standard for exposure, so different meters, brands, methods, etc may result in slightly different exposure settings (typically w/in the 1/3 stop). And .5 stop error is generally pretty minor; so none of this really matters much anyway these days.
 
Last edited:
I use exposure compensation all the time mostly for convenience (slap finger on, tweak dial with thumb). However, as I also almost always have the camera set in Aperture Priority and Manual ISO all it effectively does for me is change the shutter speed. I could just go the whole hog and have the camera in manual but its a lot slower. I use manual only when I have to, such as using off camera flash, night photography, or old lenses that don't talk to my camera.

If you use auto/program modes with auto ISO, you have already handed creative control over to your camera so who cares how it decides to change the exposure :)
 
Stegosaurus said:
If you use auto/program modes with auto ISO, you have already handed creative control over to your camera so who cares how it decides to change the exposure :)
Click to expand...

Even in full manual if you're looking at the exposure meter you're relying on the camera to do something plus you're relying on the technicians at Canikon/Sony/Fuji to also set the ISO accurately, the shutter speeds too and also maybe give you a histogram that's some use and you'll need whoever made the lens to be precise with the aperture and there's the vagaries of metering and Gosh help you if you're using a DSLR and relying on it to focus accurately and consistently with all your lenses. It's a bit of a minefield if you want to be in full control isn't it?

It's aperture for me until the light level drops to a point at which the shutter speed becomes too slow and the manual with whatever aperture and shutter speed I see fit and damn the critics... I'll have auto ISO enabled and dial in exposure compensation as and when I decide.

Heaven :D
 
woof woof said:
Even in full manual if you're looking at the exposure meter you're relying on the camera to do something ......

Heaven :D
Click to expand...

No, the point is in manual that I'm ignoring the camera's metering system. It's not about some daft philosophy of whether a photo taken in manual is somehow purer which of course it isn't if you are just doing what the camera suggests. I don't care in the slightest about that particular debate. I am however, pretty keen on ensuring that the camera is doing exactly what I want. When I use manual it is when I need to impose my personal choice over all the settings.

For example, I do a lot of off camera flash stuff using multiple flash guns. The camera light meter is useless because it has no idea what the lighting is going to do. I do not have an all singing, all dancing TTL system partly because I'm tight and partly because I enjoy doing it all manually. By which I mean exactly the kind of trial and error that you mention. Does it take ages? Yes, it can do, although once you've been doing it a while, you get a nose for the likely settings. I can only get away with this because of all the other lovely aspects of the dSLR such as the histogram and image playback so I can eyeball the result. I am not a luddite!

I fully appreciate the massive amount of knowledge and technology that goes into a camera metering system and I happily use it most of the time for holiday snaps and whatnot. But once you dive into the deep end of creative photography, you quickly find that the camera doesn't always know best.
 
I don't completely either rely on or ignore the cameras metering system but luckily as I have mirrorless cameras I have other indications of what's going on and can do things to create the output I prefer.

I agree, it shouldn't be about a daft philosophy. I just struggle to see the point in arguing that auto ISO and/or exposure compensation are somehow questionable. Once you've mastered the basics of pressing the buttons and the effect that has it's all opinion anyway. Maybe :D
 
Last edited:
Stegosaurus said:
...
For example, I do a lot of off camera flash stuff using multiple flash guns. The camera light meter is useless because it has no idea what the lighting is going to do. I do not have an all singing, all dancing TTL system partly because I'm tight and partly because I enjoy doing it all manually. By which I mean exactly the kind of trial and error that you mention. ...
Click to expand...

Exactly the sort of situation where manual mode, fixed ISO, is the right choice - and after a while you learn the sort of numbers to dial in as a starting point, which reduces the 'trial and error' time considerably.

That's the great thing about the cameras we have today - they are so flexible, and so powerful, that the same camera can be used in a range of different ways to suit different photographers needs and situations, as being digital, don't cost a fortune in film!
 
Wherever possible I would shoot with the lowest ISO for quality purposes and then choose my aperture as I am nearly always shooting stationery subjects. . I let the camera metering choose the speed, but there are many instances where the metering is not accurate enough with the Histogram either too far right or left. In these instances I would either use exposure compensation or if that wasnt sufficient then I would Bracket.
 
spudhead said:
I always shoot manual, manual iso, manual shutter speed, manual f number,
Click to expand...

Manual is useless in some situations...Maybe one day you will be in a situation where the light is changing and your missing the shots trying to keep up :)
 
KIPAX said:
Manual is useless in some situations...Maybe one day you will be in a situation where the light is changing and your missing the shots trying to keep up :)
Click to expand...


Absolutely. Always and Never are words that should be used with great care in a photographer's lexicon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top