underexposure

karq · 12-06-2008, 10:41 AM

Can I fix my K10D's underexposing problem? All the pics are underexposed. It quite sucks I dont want do use allways the manual mode.

code4code5 · 12-06-2008, 10:45 AM

With my kit lens I find that dialing in an EV of +1.3 gets the histogram right where it should be. Of course, that means slower shutter speeds, higher ISO, or larger aperture.

**Kerrowdown** · 12-06-2008, 12:17 PM

You don't say by how much or what type of photography your doing, but you can compensate as code4code5 suggests, also by shooting in raw at the post production stage you can tweak.

Marc Sabatella · 12-06-2008, 02:27 PM

It helps to leanr *why* the camera is exposing the way it is. That is, there is not a "problem" with the exposure - it's doing exactly what it's supposed to in a given situation. Where "what it's supposed to" means it is trying to make the scene look, on average, a little darker than an 18% gray card, unless that would reult in blown highlights, in which case it will make the scene even darker. This is hat any book on photography will describe. The only "problem" is that this time-honored technique doesn't always yield the exposure you would *want*. So the trick is in learning to anticipate when the default exposure won't be to your liking, and how to adjust. Namely, when your scene is *not* in fact a little darker than an 18% grey card on average, or when there are bright hihglights in your picture.

If you don't mind highlights being blown out in order to get the average exposure up a bit, switch to center weighted metering. In many cases, that's enough right there.

Also, if your background is much brighter than your subject (person standing against the sky), the standard technique is to meter off the ground, or your hand, or something other than the scene itself. Point at something that does *not* contain the sky or other very bright objects, hit AE-L to lock exposure, then reframe your shot. Works like a charm.

Same goes for your subejct is itself very light - like a bride in a white dress. You must meter off something more neutral - like a gray card. Or, you can meter off the subject itself but dial in positive exposure compensation to keep the camera from trying to render that white dress as grey.

blwnhr · 12-06-2008, 07:00 PM

Marc, it is highly possible the camera is under-exposing. My K10D has been doing if for the last few times I've taken it out.

I'm a pretty experienced photographer and understand totally the ways of the metering system. Yet my camera is constantly underexposing by 0.7-1.3 stops. This is across multiple lenses, flash, no flash, inside, outside, bright, cloudy...

I've cleaned all contacts on the mount and lenses, made sure the insides of the camera are spotless and yet it still does it.

heatherslightbox · 12-06-2008, 07:41 PM

It's not just a K20 problem, as my K20 has a habit of underexposing, as well. I find myself bumping it up by +1 and that generally solves the problem.

Heather

Marc Sabatella · 12-06-2008, 08:58 PM

Posting pictures would, of course, help. It's certianly possible to have a defective camera, but really, the vast majority of complaints of underexposure turn out to be unwarranted. I think *once* in three or so years have I seen someone post a picture that couldn't be explained completely as the camera aiming for a little darker than 18% gray but also trying to preserve highlights.

lamgray · 12-06-2008, 10:26 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

Posting pictures would, of course, help. It's certianly possible to have a defective camera, but really, the vast majority of complaints of underexposure turn out to be unwarranted. I think *once* in three or so years have I seen someone post a picture that couldn't be explained completely as the camera aiming for a little darker than 18% gray but also trying to preserve highlights.

Agreed on this. . . it also depends what you are shooting/time of day/where you are taking the light meter readings/etc. . .For instance, snow is always going to cause an off light meter reading b/c of the reflection of light. . .in which you have to adjust. Without more detail, hard to tell.

stevebrot · 12-06-2008, 11:34 PM

Originally posted by karq

Can I fix my K10D's underexposing problem? All the pics are underexposed. It quite sucks I dont want do use allways the manual mode.

May I ask if it does this with every lens?

Steve

cossack · 12-09-2008, 02:29 PM

These are all good replies. Thanks guys. I was also having these same issues and I was wondering if it was the camera (several of the so-called professional reviewers mentioned this as a sore point) or the moron operating it. I knew that EV adjusting was probably needed. And I knew that the AE-Lock was another tool to use (although I must be doing it wrong as I always seem to end up with the same crappy shot). I didn't even think about the weighted metering.

systemA · 12-09-2008, 10:20 PM

I was going to make this exact same topic...then I did some practice shots with adjustments to the meter modes (matrix/center/spot) and figured out my problem. Post #4 addresses alot of what I was experiencing, and I've adjusted accordingly. Question I had, was if Nikon/Canon had the same "issues"?

jeffkrol · 12-10-2008, 07:51 AM

Originally posted by systemA

I was going to make this exact same topic...then I did some practice shots with adjustments to the meter modes (matrix/center/spot) and figured out my problem. Post #4 addresses alot of what I was experiencing, and I've adjusted accordingly. Question I had, was if Nikon/Canon had the same "issues"?

depends on the model to a certain degree. Best to do searches at dpreviw and see for yourself. some Canon models for example had somewhat the opposite problem of over-bright base exposures. Many good outdoor photos had -EV dialed in.
This is a link to a gallery of some very nice photos w/ EXIF. short browsing shows EC in both directions but for the 350d and outdoor shots she has a -1/3 pretty much locked in...
IMG_0033s.jpg photo - Daniella T. photos at pbase.com

My take is it was necessary to contain highlights.
not sure if these were processed afterwards but she felt the need for negative EV, or other EV adjustments in the camera. Granted not as extreme as +/- 2 or something, but needed anyways.
As to Nikons, th base metering seems to have been different between some of the "consumer" and "pro" models, with the consumer models behaving like some Canon's and "overexposing".
Another thing I found was that Pentax base contrast seems particularily low. If you take an "underexposed" photo and do a "levels" adjustment it becomes a MUCH better picture.

On exposure:

'The exposure meter is calibrated to some clearly defined standards and the user needs to adjust his working method and his subject matter to these values. It does not help to suppose all kinds of assumptions that do not exist.'
Erwin Puts
On levels (even though Pentax can have some bunched up histograms it is still best to shift some w/ in camera EC but I personally am never discouraged by the darker ones because they are easily errr.. "fixed.) :
Levels and Curves - Photoshop Tips
As my own little tutorial on the power of levels w Pentax D files in particular. First photo is "as shot" w/ zero EC.
Second photo is a "sensitivity" adjustment which I assume for Pentax is exposure correction...
Third is just levels as you can see from the histogram.

12-06-2008, 10:41 AM	#1
karq Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 25	underexposure Can I fix my K10D's underexposing problem? All the pics are underexposed. It quite sucks I dont want do use allways the manual mode.

12-10-2008, 07:51 AM	#12
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by systemA I was going to make this exact same topic...then I did some practice shots with adjustments to the meter modes (matrix/center/spot) and figured out my problem. Post #4 addresses alot of what I was experiencing, and I've adjusted accordingly. Question I had, was if Nikon/Canon had the same "issues"? depends on the model to a certain degree. Best to do searches at dpreviw and see for yourself. some Canon models for example had somewhat the opposite problem of over-bright base exposures. Many good outdoor photos had -EV dialed in. This is a link to a gallery of some very nice photos w/ EXIF. short browsing shows EC in both directions but for the 350d and outdoor shots she has a -1/3 pretty much locked in... IMG_0033s.jpg photo - Daniella T. photos at pbase.com My take is it was necessary to contain highlights. not sure if these were processed afterwards but she felt the need for negative EV, or other EV adjustments in the camera. Granted not as extreme as +/- 2 or something, but needed anyways. As to Nikons, th base metering seems to have been different between some of the "consumer" and "pro" models, with the consumer models behaving like some Canon's and "overexposing". Another thing I found was that Pentax base contrast seems particularily low. If you take an "underexposed" photo and do a "levels" adjustment it becomes a MUCH better picture. On exposure: 'The exposure meter is calibrated to some clearly defined standards and the user needs to adjust his working method and his subject matter to these values. It does not help to suppose all kinds of assumptions that do not exist.' Erwin Puts On levels (even though Pentax can have some bunched up histograms it is still best to shift some w/ in camera EC but I personally am never discouraged by the darker ones because they are easily errr.. "fixed.) : Levels and Curves - Photoshop Tips As my own little tutorial on the power of levels w Pentax D files in particular. First photo is "as shot" w/ zero EC. Second photo is a "sensitivity" adjustment which I assume for Pentax is exposure correction... Third is just levels as you can see from the histogram. Last edited by jeffkrol; 12-10-2008 at 08:05 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
underexposure recovery	kenyee	Pentax Medium Format	2	09-24-2010 05:20 AM
Pentax K7 and underexposure	ulrich	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	05-13-2010 03:15 PM
MZ-7 and underexposure	photolady95	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	89	07-09-2009 09:44 AM
problem with underexposure	joaosoares5	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	03-23-2008 08:50 AM
540FGZ underexposure	Ash	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	20	03-09-2008 04:10 PM

12-06-2008, 10:45 AM	#2
code4code5 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 438	With my kit lens I find that dialing in an EV of +1.3 gets the histogram right where it should be. Of course, that means slower shutter speeds, higher ISO, or larger aperture.

12-06-2008, 12:17 PM	#3
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,816	You don't say by how much or what type of photography your doing, but you can compensate as code4code5 suggests, also by shooting in raw at the post production stage you can tweak.

12-06-2008, 02:27 PM	#4
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	It helps to leanr why the camera is exposing the way it is. That is, there is not a "problem" with the exposure - it's doing exactly what it's supposed to in a given situation. Where "what it's supposed to" means it is trying to make the scene look, on average, a little darker than an 18% gray card, unless that would reult in blown highlights, in which case it will make the scene even darker. This is hat any book on photography will describe. The only "problem" is that this time-honored technique doesn't always yield the exposure you would want. So the trick is in learning to anticipate when the default exposure won't be to your liking, and how to adjust. Namely, when your scene is not in fact a little darker than an 18% grey card on average, or when there are bright hihglights in your picture. If you don't mind highlights being blown out in order to get the average exposure up a bit, switch to center weighted metering. In many cases, that's enough right there. Also, if your background is much brighter than your subject (person standing against the sky), the standard technique is to meter off the ground, or your hand, or something other than the scene itself. Point at something that does not contain the sky or other very bright objects, hit AE-L to lock exposure, then reframe your shot. Works like a charm. Same goes for your subejct is itself very light - like a bride in a white dress. You must meter off something more neutral - like a gray card. Or, you can meter off the subject itself but dial in positive exposure compensation to keep the camera from trying to render that white dress as grey.

12-06-2008, 07:00 PM	#5
blwnhr Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 663	Marc, it is highly possible the camera is under-exposing. My K10D has been doing if for the last few times I've taken it out. I'm a pretty experienced photographer and understand totally the ways of the metering system. Yet my camera is constantly underexposing by 0.7-1.3 stops. This is across multiple lenses, flash, no flash, inside, outside, bright, cloudy... I've cleaned all contacts on the mount and lenses, made sure the insides of the camera are spotless and yet it still does it.

12-06-2008, 07:41 PM	#6
heatherslightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Gainesville, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,599	It's not just a K20 problem, as my K20 has a habit of underexposing, as well. I find myself bumping it up by +1 and that generally solves the problem. Heather

12-06-2008, 08:58 PM	#7
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Posting pictures would, of course, help. It's certianly possible to have a defective camera, but really, the vast majority of complaints of underexposure turn out to be unwarranted. I think once in three or so years have I seen someone post a picture that couldn't be explained completely as the camera aiming for a little darker than 18% gray but also trying to preserve highlights.

12-06-2008, 10:26 PM	#8
lamgray New Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Chicago, il Posts: 22	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Posting pictures would, of course, help. It's certianly possible to have a defective camera, but really, the vast majority of complaints of underexposure turn out to be unwarranted. I think once in three or so years have I seen someone post a picture that couldn't be explained completely as the camera aiming for a little darker than 18% gray but also trying to preserve highlights. Agreed on this. . . it also depends what you are shooting/time of day/where you are taking the light meter readings/etc. . .For instance, snow is always going to cause an off light meter reading b/c of the reflection of light. . .in which you have to adjust. Without more detail, hard to tell.

12-06-2008, 11:34 PM	#9
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by karq Can I fix my K10D's underexposing problem? All the pics are underexposed. It quite sucks I dont want do use allways the manual mode. May I ask if it does this with every lens? Steve

12-09-2008, 02:29 PM	#10
cossack New Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Calgary Posts: 6	These are all good replies. Thanks guys. I was also having these same issues and I was wondering if it was the camera (several of the so-called professional reviewers mentioned this as a sore point) or the moron operating it. I knew that EV adjusting was probably needed. And I knew that the AE-Lock was another tool to use (although I must be doing it wrong as I always seem to end up with the same crappy shot). I didn't even think about the weighted metering.

12-09-2008, 10:20 PM	#11
systemA Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: New York, NY Posts: 385	I was going to make this exact same topic...then I did some practice shots with adjustments to the meter modes (matrix/center/spot) and figured out my problem. Post #4 addresses alot of what I was experiencing, and I've adjusted accordingly. Question I had, was if Nikon/Canon had the same "issues"?