Nikon F6 Metering issues

[shivpan]

Hi,

I recently moved from Nikon F5 to F6. I shot 12 rolls of Fujichrome Velvia 100F in the Himalayan mountains in May this year. Most of my 12 rolls have come out underexposed.

Camera: Nikon F6
Film : Fujichrome Velvia 100F
Lens : Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF
Flash : SB 800

The following are the custom setting on my camera, the rest are at default settings.

C1. AE lock = +Release
C2. AE-L/AF-L = AE lock only
D2. Film rewind = manual
D6. DX Warning = Always visible

I am trying to figure out what went wrong. Is the camera malfunctioning? Or am I doing something wrong?

I have uploaded 4 sample photographs from my trip for your comments. All of them were taken on Matrix Metering. TOP LEFT - Matrix metering, TOP RIGHT - Matrix metering with flash 1/60th of second, BOTTOM LEFT - Matrix metering with flash 1/60th of second, BOOTOM RIGHT - Matrix metering.

I would appreciate your response. It will help me to decide on what I should do next.

Regards,
Shiv

[deckcadet]

Vary your metering mode. You're using matrix in shots with a lot of strong highlights and it is compensating for that. the bottom left shot doesn't really look underexposed to me but rather flatter because of the flash.

You have to use the different metering modes when the situation dictates. The bottom right shot would have benefitted from center weighted metering, which would have brought up the shadows. Same with the top-left, as the sky throws it off. The top-right shot would have benefited from either center weighted or spot meter, and having used an FV-Lock (flash value lock) while zoomed in more on the face and upper body. The high reflection of the light off his robes and surroundings fooled the metering system and flash.

[ChrisWade]

Just some general comments...first all cameras digital or film with built in light meters are manufactured to certain tolerances. These variances include ISO, the meter itself and shutter speeds.

Second matrix metering itself is a system that measures light according to a specific rule set based on thousands of photos. Generally it produces good results...but can be fooled by certain scenes.

What I would suggest you do...is do a number of test shoots under known conditions in various metering modes and see if most of them are under exposed. If they are then you could have your camera serviced asking them to calibrate your camera for proper exposure. Alternatively, you could establish how far out you are and then use exposure compensation to adjust for the deviation.

There is a review in the news section here on Perfect-Pixs you may want to check out.

Chris Wade
Perfect-Pixs

[mwfanelli]

Hi,

I recently moved from Nikon F5 to F6. I shot 12 rolls of Fujichrome Velvia 100F in the Himalayan mountains in May this year. Most of my 12 rolls have come out underexposed.

Some random observations...

Exposure with slide film, especially Velvia, is extremely tricky. Using matrix metering was your downfall. The latitude for slides is so small that you have to "roll your own" and use your experience to get the exposure you need. Also, the range from highlights to shadows is very small with slides, lots smaller than print film, smaller even than digital. This makes capturing a wide range of light very tough if not impossible.

On a huge trip I used to carry half-and-half slide film and print film to make sure something would work. These days, with digital, I check the histogram and take an immediate look at the results.

You could go back to the Himalaya and take print film or a DSLR with you... :-)

[another view]

I'm mainly curious about how this situation is versus the F5. I've owned an F5 and F100 and the F5's matrix meter was much better in difficult situations - but not perfect. Have you tried the F5 and F6 side by side? Those custom settings won't affect exposure.

[mwfanelli]

I'm mainly curious about how this situation is versus the F5. I've owned an F5 and F100 and the F5's matrix meter was much better in difficult situations - but not perfect. Have you tried the F5 and F6 side by side? Those custom settings won't affect exposure.

OK. Well, I have no idea how the F5 does metering but there are several classic exposure errors here that are camera-independent.

The first image has more range than slide film can handle regardless of camera. Eliminate the background, come back later in the day, or use a graduated ND filter. The matrix metering tried hard to give you a decent balance with what it had.

The second image: Dark skin is not 18% gray, the value that meters read. You should have opened up the exposure a bit to get the subject well exposed. You should also bracket with slide film in cases such as this.

Third image: doesn't look all that bad. I would have darkened it up a bit by about 1/3 stop. It also appears that flash was used, is that true?

Fourth image: Again, way too much difference between shadows and highlights. Slide film will do this. Same advice as image number one.

All of this assumes that the scans of film did not add their own problems. Cheap scans, homebrew or in-shop, have a very tough time with slides. Try paying for some drum or Tango scans to see what you really have.

My advice is to not rely on the camera to make all the exposure decisions for you. The F5 and F6 are good cameras but can't create something from nothing nor think for themselves. Use your own common sense for exposures. Use print film or digital, both are more forgiving than slides. Use the best possible scans for slide film.

[another view]

All of this assumes that the scans of film did not add their own problems. Cheap scans, homebrew or in-shop, have a very tough time with slides. Try paying for some drum or Tango scans to see what you really have.

My advice is to not rely on the camera to make all the exposure decisions for you. The F5 and F6 are good cameras but can't create something from nothing nor think for themselves. Use your own common sense for exposures. Use print film or digital, both are more forgiving than slides. Use the best possible scans for slide film.

Very true about the scans - only so much we can guess without seeing the original chromes. Any metering system will work very well in even, low contrast lighting with all mid-tone colors. The problem will happen with higher contrast lighting and elements of the shot that aren't mid-tone. Some work better than others, and the F5's matrix is very good - but like I said, not perfect. We don't always know how the camera will handle a highlight and that can change based on how much of the frame is highlight and what the contrast is, etc. One pro I know generally used his F5 in manual mode with the spot meter - and was very consistent because of this.

The camera can never think for you and never knows what you want. Slide film can only handle a certain amount of latitude, but from what you say I'm guessing you're familiar with how that works.

[racingpinarello]

I have a F6, but always use spot metering when using Velvia. The first image is an impossible situation without a ND Grad filter. The range of exposure is probably 5-6 stops, at least. No slide film or digital camera will take that image perfectly on one exposure.

At the beginning of any camera, I shoot a grey card in even lighting on manual and placing the camera on a tripod. Then I shoot the card with -2 stops up to +2 stops at 1/3 increments with the camera @ f/8. Taking notes of exposure number and the shutter speed.

Write down the exposure reading on A setting to get a shutter speed @ f/8. Compare the best looking slide from the manual exposure vs automatic setting slide. In a real world, the manual exposure slide at say (1/60 sec @f/8) should be the same the camera's exposure setting.

If not, then you need to make a note of the exposure compensation to have them match.

For me, I always overexpose Velvia by 1/3 stop.


My experience with the F6 has been very good, but the exposure on the F5 was extraordinary. It's a winner.
Loren

[another view]

My experience with the F6 has been very good, but the exposure on the F5 was extraordinary.

Loren, just curious but are you saying that the F5 was better than the F6 here? The F5 was really great and I couldn't see how they could get much better with the F6.

[racingpinarello]

I am not sure if it's better, but I could put the F5 on Program Mode and Matrix Metering, and just shoot away and the exposure was always very good.

The F6 has very good metering, but the results on the Prgram Mode and Matrix Metering have yet to give me the same confidence. Maybe I am overthinking, but I trusted my F5 completely.

The same thing with my RZ67. My older 67 produced great results on the semi-auto settings, while my newer RZ67ii comes out with slightly underexposed images. Correctable with exposure compensation. The end conclusion is that every camera is different, and it's good to have a test roll to find out if you need manually adjust exposure on your camera.

Loren

[rdaniel]

As you know, F5 and F6 uses a large internal database to match the current photo against it for proper exposure. The first photo up in the mountains is very suspicious. Could you have possibly found the one scenario the F6 doesn't have
in it's database (which usually amounts to one bad exposure in a thousand rolls)?

I would say these are all too far off for an F6. An F5 would have never
been that far off. Could exposure comp possibly have been bumped to -1?
Was there anything attached to the lens such as extension, lens shade, etc.?

If you are 100% sure that all settings were appropriate, here's what I would
do: Recreate a scene similar to the first photo using small props which would
cause the camera to not expose correctly. I know it sounds like a lot of work but
believe it or not it only takes a few minutes. This is what I do with all my
new cameras. Take a few photos and play with exposure comps and other adjustments
one at a time and write them down. See what changes occur. It would really be
helpful if you could borrow another camera like an F5 or an FM3A and a handheld
meter to compare.

Or...

Another much more accurate method to test the camera would be to acquire an
IT8 TARGET for test photos.

http://www.eximvaios.com/catalog/images/kodak_IT8.jpg

Also, I almost forgot the most obvious question. Where and how were these
developed? I usually shoot at least one or two photos of the IT8 target
at the beginning of every roll just to make sure the developer doesn't
screw it up.

A and I has worked out pretty well. Also Hamilton Color Labs here in
Omaha does a pretty decent job.

http://www.hamiltoncolorlab.com/

http://www.aandi.com/