5D and under exposure!

onform

onform

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,860
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
OK me again!

Any time I take a shot using my 5D mkI the shots look fine when viewing the LCD but when I get home the shots always come out underexposed it seems to be worse when I take shots using only natural light.

At first i thought it was me doing something wrong so I went out today and shot using the camera's light meter then checking the histogram for exposure and ignored what the LCD was showing me. the histograms were all good when viewed after each shot,

But once again when I got home underexposed. once tweaked in level's they look OK but i am really trying to get my shots right in camera.

Does anyone else have this?

Matt
 
The exposure on mine seem fine. I've got to ask, have you checked:
- White balance
- Exposure correction
 
How much out ?, can you post a sample.
 
OK will upload to flickr now then post.
 
is your monitor calibrated?
Do they print over-exposed before you have adjusted them?
Is it RAW or jpeg you use?
 
Here is one of the shots I took today straight out of camera

Exposure: 0.003 sec (1/400)
Aperture: f/14.0
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
White balance: Daylight

And a graduated ND filter

3392477747_f3d54ae041.jpg
 
ppp said:
is your monitor calibrated?
Do they print over-exposed before you have adjusted them?
Is it RAW or jpeg you use?
Click to expand...

No my monitor isn't calibrated

I have not tried printing them yet

And I shoot in jpeg at the moment, as my monitor can't handle adobe or canon raw programs
 
Here is the very same photo after a very quick spit and sawdust PP job!

3393295814_4f55b8bea1.jpg
 
Definitely try and get your monitor calibrated - I used to get the opposite (shots looked over exposed even though histogram fine). After calibration look good and also important for when you print the images out (so that print matches what you see on screen)
 
kilsbm said:
Definitely try and get your monitor calibrated - I used to get the opposite (shots looked over exposed even though histogram fine). After calibration look good and also important for when you print the images out (so that print matches what you see on screen)
Click to expand...

What does it look like on your calibrated monitor then? the first one that is...lol
 
I have to say that is what I would expect from my camera.
Looking at the histogram you have lots of info there, it's not all down towards the shadows. I wouldn't be worried with that at all.
 
natjag said:
I have to say that is what I would expect from my camera.
Looking at the histogram you have lots of info there, it's not all down towards the shadows. I wouldn't be worried with that at all.
Click to expand...

How can i check the histogram once out of the camera?
 
You certainly need to get your monitor calibrated onform. The first one looks more or less OK and the second one is way too bright.
 
onform said:
Here is one of the shots I took today straight out of camera

Exposure: 0.003 sec (1/400)
Aperture: f/14.0
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
White balance: Daylight

And a graduated ND filter

3392477747_f3d54ae041.jpg
Click to expand...

Not the best example to use, firstly you have a large expanse on bright area (the sky) which will fool the meter into underexposing (it doesn't know what you are pointing it at and averages out the readings based on an average scene, this scene is definitely not average and secondly, when you take into account the graduated filter, it is even less average.

You need to take some trial shots of an average scene, or spot meter from a grey card or green grass and use the reading from that, do not use filters and it is best to use manual for testing and maybe spot metering initailly, only testing the auto capability when you have understood what the cameras meter is doing in manual.

Funny thing is I think all of my Canons (30D, 5D and 5Dmk2) have slightly overexposed by between 1/3 and 2/3 stops and if shooting in auto regularly dial in 2/3 stop underexposure, but then i understand what i am metering from!

On my calibrated monitor, your image does not look too bad considering the scene!
 
onform said:
And I shoot in jpeg at the moment, as my monitor can't handle adobe or canon raw programs
Click to expand...

This makes no sense.

The camera is doing exactly what it's supposed to. You're showing it a scene with a lot of bright areas. It's metering for those areas and retaining highlights. It's up to you to know this'll happen and adjust the EV on the camera accordingly.
 
natjag said:
If you use photoshop it will be there.
When you go to alter levels (even if you don't) you will see the histogram.
Or in canon's DPP software.
Click to expand...

Yes, sorry I know that. I thought that in some way you brought up the histogram using the meta data or something...nevermind...lol :bonk:
 
Radiohead said:
This makes no sense.

The camera is doing exactly what it's supposed to. You're showing it a scene with a lot of bright areas. It's metering for those areas and retaining highlights. It's up to you to know this'll happen and adjust the EV on the camera accordingly.
Click to expand...

What makes no sense?

I used a ND graduated 3 stop filter to average out the scene then used the light meter and histogram to adjust EV??

I think we've established the problem id my monitor.....I need a new one, then I can start shooting raw too..
 
OH sorry...lol

my monitor is 1280 by 720 pixels but when i load adobe or canon raw programs it says warning screen resolution needs to be 768 pixels minimum do you want to carry on anyway? then when I click yes the right hand and bottom edges of the program are not visable.. and thus renders the program inoperable.
 
Adobe and canon Raw programs both require a screen resolution of 768 pixels to operate normally whereas my monitor only has 720 max. It doesn't work! all the important stuff is off the screen.

I can't put it any simpler than that....any way this has not relevance to the OP!
 
That doesn't sound like a problem with your monitor, it sounds like a problem with your graphics card drivers. I'd make sure you have the latest drivers installed for your card, then try and change the screen resolution. It also sounds to me like you're sitting on 16-bit colours too.
 
Let me guess, you're either using a netbook, a 720p (HR Ready) LCD TV as your monitor or you're actually using a widescreen computer monitor with the resolution silly low.

;)

Also, as has been mentioned, the large majority of the frame was filled with sky, the camera tried to get this as close to 18% grey as possible which caused the darker areas to be underexposed a little. It's not a fault with the camera, it's just how they work, they aren't smart enough to know what you want properly exposed yet :)
 
Gofer said:
You certainly need to get your monitor calibrated onform. The first one looks more or less OK and the second one is way too bright.
Click to expand...

Agreed :plusone:
 
It looks as though the general consensus is that it's the monitor that's the problem.
can you
a/ increase the brightness of the display?
b/ reduce the ambient brightness of the room you are in?
 
Col_M said:
Let me guess, you're either using a netbook, a 720p (HR Ready) LCD TV as your monitor or you're actually using a widescreen computer monitor with the resolution silly low.
Click to expand...

Busted!! lol this is my PC and monitor, sony 50inch LCD TV and sony media PC with HDMI connection only.

3395119042_eec8f8cd18.jpg


Now before anyone pipes up and tells me this just isn't cricket my first priority was camera equipment so that's where all my money went! I did/do still intend on getting a decent editing PC and monitor when funds permit. Looks like it's going to have to be sooner than I intended. :razz:
 
Yeah, that'll be your problem, TV's are meant to make films and TV look good and the colours unfortunately aren't faithful enough to be used for photo editing. The vertical resolution also isn't enough to run some programs like you've found out.

Not much you can do until you get a computer monitor, you could look for a fix to force camera raw and Ps/Lr to run at lower resolutions, I think some people have done it so it'll run on their netbooks. The calibration issue isn't really something you can fix without a calibrator, I'm not completely sure how a LCD TV would take to being calibrated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top