The Sony "high ISO" thing.

[Vidgamer]

I generally use a +.7 compensation when using ISO 1600, sometimes less. At lower ISO, the exposures seem fine, even with matrix -- sorry, multi-segment -- metering. There just seems to be something weird about ISO 1600 (and ISO 800 to a lesser extent). This is with an A100. And this is based on my own experiments and real-world photos, not from a forum. Actually, it's something I noticed very early after my A100 purchase (needing to increase the compensation at 800 and above).

[bfitzgerald]

I did a quick test

A200

gives an exposure of 1/10th sec ISO 1600 f5, same AF point used for both




KM5d gives default metering of 1/5th sec at ISO 1600 f5



Obviously underexposure is not helping things at high ISO. I think this area has been around since as said, the A100. It's about time Sony got a handle on things and made some adjustments to exposure at high iSO.

[Javelin]

what might be the diference is the 40 segment vs 14 segment metering. the sky in that shot could pull the whole exposure down if there are enough sensors on it.

[Elisha]

the a200 is at 1/10 and the 5D is at 1/5. try with the same shutter speed and i bet it will be closer.

[Dusty]

Doesn't the chart just show that Sony is "right" and KM is overexposing? Or am I reading the results wrong.

Dusty

[bfitzgerald]

For years everyone has known underexposure is a disaster for high ISO shooting. Yet Sony have their earplugs firmly in, and think it's a good idea to keep underexposing at high ISO. Sigh......

At this stage it's frankly gone beyond a joke..everyone spots it..knows about it. Nothing happens!
Sony DSLR reviews, and the noise thing rears up again..and nothing happens again. Incredibly easy to fix..simple adjustment of the metering.

These new batch of cameras seem just as prone to underexposure, if not more so. Sony ain't winning the "listen to your users" award, that is certain

[Javelin]

all that aside. won;t the increased amount of sensors want to try and expose more evenly? I understand the bias is towards underexposing. but the test shot barry posted isn't evenly toned across the whole image. if this test was shot of just an evenly lit background would the A200 still show less exposure than the 5D?

I'm not convinced on the AF point influencing the metering either. how can you test so as it shows this?

[bfitzgerald]

AF point def does influence metering..try it for yourself, put an object in the window..AF on different parts of the scene..huge difference in exposures.

A200 def underexposes in low light situations, and sometimes to the point of "in the bin" shots wise. This was one of the less lethal examples, but it's clearly not giving a good even exposure in that scene, esp so since the AF point was in a shadow area..not the sky.

Don't get me wrong, a bit under is ok in daylight..no problems more than then over for me, but at high ISO..it's like chopping your leg off moments before you start the 1500m race..you are just stuffing yourself up big time! lol

I'll have a dig about I have some more examples, I did some horse jumping stuff in low light..and had to dump the A200 fairly fast, back to the old 5d for that one..huge differences in exposure. Needs a fix from Sony..but some hope of that! BTW all 3 A200 bodies I tried did the same thing..

Depressing thing about Sony is, if you drove a huge truck into Sony HQ with "fix metering underexposure" they would still miss it..doh! It's like watching the Simpsons at times..heck even A900 users are left to fend for themselves