'M' for moron?

[liquefied]

What shooting mode does everyone use most often here? I got my 400D a few weeks back and the second I got it out of the box I put it on M and haven't moved the wheel since. I'm pretty new to photography and this is my first SLR so I thought it'd be best to learn the basics before I let the camera do things for me. It seems like there are a lot of people on here who use auto or the semi-auto settings (especially after seeing the XTi underexposure threads) when maybe they should stick to M for awhile until they understand how everything works.

[grego]

I shoot M a lot. When i was learning, i used AV a lot. I still use AV when i don't have time to fully adjust and I know the lighting situation isn't overly drastic(as the shutter speed can drop below hand holding ability).

Knowing how to properly expose is important though. Manual gives you so much power. Even if you decide to go to semi-auto, its always good to know how to manually expose. It's very useful for times when light is tricky.

[tsaraleksi]

When the light changes a lot, in a fast paced situation you can't afford to be playing around with exposure settings, Av is by far the best choice. In flat light manual is excellent, in particular, as well as in any kind of artifically lit situation where you want to dramatically underexpose say, the background.

[jrjphoto]

I mostly shoot M with custom white balance, and I shoot my hand to aid in setting the exposure with the digital polaroid and histogram. In second place is Av. Doing quickie night shots, I've been known to throw the camera into portrait mode and bounce flash into a hand-held reflector utilizing the E-TTL of my 420EX.

So, yeah, M. Learn your settings. Practice make perfect. A stitch in time saves nine. Wait, what?!

[JaGWiRE]

Originally Posted by tsaraleksi

When the light changes a lot, in a fast paced situation you can't afford to be playing around with exposure settings, Av is by far the best choice. In flat light manual is excellent, in particular, as well as in any kind of artifically lit situation where you want to dramatically underexpose say, the background.

Yep, when I'm tracking a subject, manual can just kill me, getting over or under exposed photos by 1/3 stops, 2/3, 1 stop, etc. After post processing it's okay, but I'de rather avoid that all together.

I have no flash yet, but I think in any semi-auto mode flash is used as a fill only, where as in manual it can be used for other things (don't know what, I'm a total newb for flash.)

[gospastic]

i usually use whatever mode i need to to get the shot i want. mostly Av, some M, Tv rarely. I've used P a couple times.

[AdamJL]

I've been using M since the beginning. Though I will choose Av sometimes if I need to shoot quickly (Av is made for sports, and animals imo).... I never choose Tv because depth of field makes or breaks a shot and I don't want to leave that up to the camera.

[Jim G]

I think M or Av are probably the best two modes for learning in... I pretty much exclusively use these two, I think my camera's been on Sport mode once about half an hour after I bought it so I could hear the "clack clack clack clack clack" of the shutter and that was about it...

[Pete-eos]

I started off with M, because its the first one I understood in the Manual!
Since moved to Av and Tv...

[Littlefield]

For landscpaes Av is best .I shoot manual too especially for waterfalls .
Regards
Don

[AdamJL]

Originally Posted by Littlefield

For landscpaes Av is best

I'll disagree with that (though it's all personal preference of course)

If you shoot with any sort of light in the sky, the dynamic range is going to be quite high. Giving the camera the choice of shutter speed with such a dynamic range can be a mistake, unless you use Grad ND filters to minimise the difference in highs and lows. I trust my own judgement and my own preference to underexpose in preference to the camera's decisions.
If you've got the right scene, I find it's best to take the time and compose the shot. You can wait hours some times for the right conditions, so why leave half of the work to the camera if you've already put in so much effort? Go the full distance and have full manual control of the camera for landscapes.

Again though, this is just personal preference, and I'm not saying Av is bad for landscapes at all, just it's best to have full control IMO.

[Bill Ng]

I've posted a huge rant about this before ... but I'd like to remind everyone again that M brings you absolutely nothing over Av or Tv. In non-flash situations M brings you nothing but slower shooting. M is there for situations where the internal light meter cannot be trusted.

Putting your camera in M, selecting an aperture of f/4 and rotating the other wheel until the exposure indicator is dead in the middle of the graph is the exact same thing as putting your camera in Av and half-depressing the shutter. The difference of course, is that it takes your camera a fraction of a second to do it while it takes you a lot longer than that.

Putting your camera in M, selecting a shutter speed of 1/125 and rotating the other wheel until the exposure indicator is dead in the middle of the graph is the exact same thing as putting your camera in Tv and half-depressing the shutter. The difference of course, is that it takes your camera a fraction of a second to do it while it takes you a lot longer than that.

For those situations where you need to under or overexpose (as compared to what the internal light-meter thinks is correct) ... in Av or Tv you would simply rotate the exposure compensation dial (which would be exactly what you'd have to do in M mode as well, only again, this would take less time).

As I mentioned in my rant, I understand that some people will have some situations that would necessitate M ... I was using a lot of flash indoors this weekend and set it on M for a few hours for instance ... but for 98% of the photos I see posted on POTN ... Av or Tv would be all that's necessary.

And for the record, being in M mode doesn't "teach you about exposure" ... it does little more than teach you an extremely inefficient method of shooting.

Bill

[cwphoto]

Originally Posted by Bill Ng

I've posted a huge rant about this before ... but I'd like to remind everyone again that M brings you absolutely nothing over Av or Tv. In non-flash situations M brings you nothing but slower shooting. M is there for situations where the internal light meter cannot be trusted.

Putting your camera in M, selecting an aperture of f/4 and rotating the other wheel until the exposure indicator is dead in the middle of the graph is the exact same thing as putting your camera in Av and half-depressing the shutter. The difference of course, is that it takes your camera a fraction of a second to do it while it takes you a lot longer than that.

Putting your camera in M, selecting a shutter speed of 1/125 and rotating the other wheel until the exposure indicator is dead in the middle of the graph is the exact same thing as putting your camera in Tv and half-depressing the shutter. The difference of course, is that it takes your camera a fraction of a second to do it while it takes you a lot longer than that.

For those situations where you need to under or overexpose (as compared to what the internal light-meter thinks is correct) ... in Av or Tv you would simply rotate the exposure compensation dial (which would be exactly what you'd have to do in M mode as well, only again, this would take less time).

As I mentioned in my rant, I understand that some people will have some situations that would necessitate M ... I was using a lot of flash indoors this weekend and set it on M for a few hours for instance ... but for 98% of the photos I see posted on POTN ... Av or Tv would be all that's necessary.

And for the record, being in M mode doesn't "teach you about exposure" ... it does little more than teach you an extremely inefficient method of shooting.

Bill

...or for those of us who still like to use an external light meter.

[Bill Ng]

Originally Posted by cwphoto

...or for those of us who still like to use an external light meter.

Yep ... that definitely qualifies. Does anyone use those things anymore (joking, joking)

[SkipD]

Originally Posted by cwphoto

...or for those of us who still like to use an external light meter.

Right on....

In my opinion, the best way for someone to learn about exposure is not to use a built-in meter with the various degrees of accompanying automation, but to use a handheld meter and manual settings on a camera. That way the student can more easily learn about relationship between shutter speed, aperture, and ISO settings (ISA film speed for us old buggers). Once the basics are mastered, then one can progress to using a greater variety of tools for various reasons.

This concept is the same that I suggest for teaching/learning any craft skill set - woodworking, welding, painting, or whatever. Start with the simplest basics and progress from there once the basics are mastered.

Back to exposure - I often use my handheld meter when shooting outdoor events such as the soapbox derby I recently photographed. The handheld meter is usually in incident mode and using it that way allows me to quickly check the level of the lighting itself. I make a small tweak to the camera settings as the lighting level changes. When using this technique, I will use the built-in meter only as an indicator that things may be changing but will usually check the incident meter before deciding to change the camera settings.

You may ask why I work using this method. It's because a reflected light meter - especially one which built into the camera and functioning automatically when you take each shot - can often be fooled by the subject's color and reflectivity when shooting a variety of subjects in the same lighting with little or no time to set up individually for each shot. When I use incident readings, I usually have far better consistency in my exposures for an outdoor event than I would using purely automatic exposure control by the camera.