The Sony "high ISO" thing.

[douglasf13]

I think that something that may be a little confusing in some of these posts is the term "overexpose." Overexpose doesn't mean adding exposure compensation, but, rather, blowing highlights that you don't want to blow out. With the A900, matrix metering needs around +.5 EV compensation, generally (albeit, matrix mode in all cameras should be avoided if consistency is of utmost concern.) This doesn't mean one is overexposing. It means one is exposing correctly. Does that make sense?

[Dr. Harout]

I think that something that may be a little confusing in some of these posts is the term "overexpose." Overexpose doesn't mean adding exposure compensation, but, rather, blowing highlights that you don't want to blow out. With the A900, matrix metering needs around +.5 EV compensation, generally (albeit, matrix mode in all cameras should be avoided if consistency is of utmost concern.) This doesn't mean one is overexposing. It means one is exposing correctly. Does that make sense?

OK, I agree and you are absolutely right. So allow me to rephrase what I wrote: at 1600 ISO you should compensate the exposure AT LEAST by +0.7

[harvey]

One of the easiest ways to ruin an indoor shoot is to underexpose your high ISO Sony shots. Sony noise control and reduction techniques are far too crude and they make a mess of the darker parts of the frame almost every time. It's much easier to deal with hot background highlights etc. than it is dealing with blobs without eyes for faces...

-Sonolta

I was thinking more generally of what I would want from automatic exposure on a camera and not specifically of the high ISO situations. I have not had the A900 very long so have not ventured far into the ISO range, my previous digital compacts were so bad I did not venture past ISO 400.

If I look at some of the CIFL photos this seems to be a real challenge. Black uniforms, helmets with reflections and some really dark backgrounds.

[harvey]

I think that something that may be a little confusing in some of these posts is the term "overexpose." Overexpose doesn't mean adding exposure compensation, but, rather, blowing highlights that you don't want to blow out. With the A900, matrix metering needs around +.5 EV compensation, generally (albeit, matrix mode in all cameras should be avoided if consistency is of utmost concern.) This doesn't mean one is overexposing. It means one is exposing correctly. Does that make sense?

In the "old days" when you had centre-weighted metering you learned where to point the camera to get a reasonable exposure or you compensated. With multi-segment metering it is much harder to second-guess the metering. I knew when I got the A900 it had a reputation to underexpose and I have seen this but also the camera can get the exposure bang on for what I want. For the sort of photos I have been taking I don't mind underexposure. In your experience is +0.5EV safe (for normal ISO use), I was thinknig +0.3EV would be safer based on what I have seen so far.

Harvey

[douglasf13]

I know that the A900 meters middle grey to green channel clipping at +3.2EV, and spot metering middle gray should be done at +.5EV. The problem with matrix metering mode is that, with even the best cameras, it is inconsistent, so, if you're really trying to eek out the most exposure possible, it's tough to use. I use my AEL button to spot meter highlights at +3.0 EV most often, but do occasionally use matrix at +.5 ev.

[bfitzgerald]

It's pretty simple to work out multi zone/honey comb (not matrix, that is a nikon term) metering.

The info we have is AF based (aka bias to the AF point used), it knows the distance (with D lenses I imagine), and should be able to know in or out of focus areas.
The metering itself comparing directly the 5d and A200 (and film bodies), does not appear to differ much at all in terms of the way it reacts..almost the same in many situations, though the 5d would give a bit more exposure at times. Simply the case appears to be, that Sony is simply not giving as much exposure overall as the 5d is. This might be the ISO sensitivity of the Sony not being as near to the stated speed, in camera tonal curves etc. Def not the same cameras in that regard. The 5d was capable of some underexposure in situations with lots of white etc, but it tended to be "a bit", the A200 is "even more, by some margin"

Maybe the metering is tuned to the ISO ratings, and Sony are not close enough to the actual sensitivity.

Regardless, I believe there is a case for some adjustment here by Sony. However, at least for lower end bodies..that's about as likely as seeing a Tamil Tiger wandering around in full combat gear in Sri Lanka.

[douglasf13]

I understand that multi-segment does work, but, if you're using techniques like uniWB to eek out extra exposure out of your camera, none of the manufacturer's have a consistent enough version of it.

[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