01-30-2015 10:36 AM
Hi evrybody. I have been shooting with EOS 5D Mk III since May 2014 before I embarked on 5-week family trip on the West Coast during July and August. I shot many and many pictures in all sorts of conditions. My major disappointment with the camera is its metering. At least my version underexposes terribly. I read some discussion threads here and elsewhere, cleared whatever settings there may had been left from the factory but the problem is still there. Sometimes +1 exposure compensation does not help since in LR I need to push it another stop to get it right. When somebody says that Canon is little bit conservative in its in-camera meters I cannot agree less. I had a Nikon D80 before and at least there was no any metering issue. If Nikon got it right on their cheap camera I cannot see why Canon should be behind. I also read about people sending their 5d mk iii to Canon servic and hed it re-calibrated.
Thanks for any suggestions but I am little bit tired of tweaking the camera everytime i take a picture.
Jan (lives in Switzerland)
10-20-2015 10:59 AM
@janko wrote:Dear Tim,
Thank you very much for your valuable thoughts. I use CPL most of the time when sun is out and there are blue skies, preferably with some white clouds.
The RV shot was 99% done with CPL, but still TTL should compensate for it, right? I am using 17-40 4L, 27-80 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L Mk II. When I look on my pictures in photoshop in the "grid" my general impression is that they are darker.
I used Nikon D80 before (not a great camera) but never had such issue. In fact it was opposite: bright sunny blue skies (mid) days meant -0.5 or - 0.75 compensation. With Canon 5D Mk III it is to have +1 compensation as default for any situation and bright sunny blue skies days it is up to +2. Recently I spent a week in Rome, taking pictures in churches etc and sometimes I had to compensate +2 at least. I am considering sending camera to Canon for check up.
With the best regards,
Jan
In high contrast situations the camera will expose to protect the highlights. The reason for this is when you 'blowout' a highlight the detail is unrecoverable. However, when there is a slight underexposure, the data is there and can be 'pushed' to bring out the detail in the shadows.
For an ideal exposure you almost always have to do some post processing adjustment. Do a Google search for 'Getting it Right in Camera: Ep 235: Digital Photography 1 on 1: Adorama Photography TV', the video explains why.
I use Evaluative metering and typically run +2/3 exposure compensation and adjust as necessary.
07-16-2015 03:44 PM
TCampbell wrote...
Keep in mind that when you use a "reflective" meter, several things can throw the metering.
(a) are you using full 'evaluative' metering, or have you switched to an alternate metering area? (e.g. spot metering, etc.)?
(b) have you dialed in exposure compensation without realizing it? (your EXIF data will tell you if you dialed in exposure compensation).
(c) are you metering subjects that are known to throw metering? (e.g. metering very dark things or very white things will throw the accuracy of the metering. That's normal for in-camera meters because of the nature of "reflected" light vs. "incident" light.)...
Tim is right, but he mixed up the reflective vs incident metering ininitially, so I corrected it above.
Your 5DIII uses a reflective metering system. All cameras with through-the-lens meterings systems have to use this type. As Tim mentions, reflected light is highly susceptible to being skewed by subject tonality.... so, for example, a mostly white snow scene would tend to underexpose badly, while a mostly black coal mine would want to overexpose heavily. The metering system is only able to interpret everything as "medium gray". This is the reason our cameras have Exposure Compensation, to correct these "errors" caused by extremes of subject tonality.
Separate handheld light meters are available in a variety of types... one of which is an incident meter. When used correctly, this type of meter measures the light falling onto the subject, instead of what's being reflected off of it. This makes for a much more accurate reading, in many cases, because it's not subject to the skewing by subject tonality.
Withouit seeing an example image with EXIF data intact, it's hard to say with much certainty. But, another possiblity is the wrong camera metering mode being used. You have choice of Evaluative, Center Weighted, Partial and Spot metering patterns .
Evaluative and Center Weighted similarly measure most of the image area seen in the viewfinder. They differ in that Evaluative places more emphasis right around the active AF point, sort of assuming that's your primary subject. Center Weighted simply puts a bit more emphasis on the center of the image area, as the name implies. Partial measures a somewhat smaller area and Spot meters just the very center of the image, as indicated by a circle seen in the viewfinder. All these have their purposes. Evaluative is probably the best to set as default, will usually give good results. Partial and especially Spot have to be used correctly, can cause problems if accidentally set and used wrong.
Sure, there is possibility that something is out of calibration in your camera. Something faulty like lens aperture that's not working correctly also might cause a lot of incorrectly exposed images. But a lot of the time it's simply something set wrong. We may be able to tell more, if we can see a sample "bad" image, as Tim requested.
***********
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & EXPOSUREMANAGER
07-16-2015 05:07 PM
Thanks for the catch on me mixing the "incident" vs "reflective" (yes, the meter inside the camera measures "reflected" light that bounces off the subject and scene.)
Allan, the sample images were posted here: http://community.usa.canon.com/t5/media/v2/gallerypage/user-id/59200/tab/all
The EXIF data is not inside the images but screenshots of the EXIF data were posted with the images (I just cross-referenced the image name in the EXIF data to the image file in the user gallery.)
01-05-2019 11:44 PM
Janko, did you ever resolve this? I am still struggling with severe under exposed images. to the extent that 3200 ISO on a cloudy day or indoors is still coming in dark. This is severe not simply a bad user error. Anyone else had this issue and found a resolve? Maybe a firmware update is needed? I am not ready to ditch this camera. It is way out of waranty obviously and may even be out of serviceable recognition by canon.
01-06-2019 10:54 AM
@908carl wrote:Janko, did you ever resolve this? I am still struggling with severe under exposed images. to the extent that 3200 ISO on a cloudy day or indoors is still coming in dark. This is severe not simply a bad user error. Anyone else had this issue and found a resolve? Maybe a firmware update is needed? I am not ready to ditch this camera. It is way out of waranty obviously and may even be out of serviceable recognition by canon.
This thread is four years old. Do not expect any replies. I suggest you start a new thread for your issue. When you do, I suggest that you post a sample image of your issue. Don’t forget to state what camera you are using, and whether or not this is a new problem, or one that the camera has always had.
12/05/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS R5 Mark II - Version 1.0.2
09/26/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS R6 Mark II - Version 1.5.0
07/01/2024: New firmware updates are available.
Canon U.S.A Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part without permission is prohibited.