'M' for moron?

I shoot in M about 90% of the time, the rest would be in AV when I have available light.

Patrick S wrote in post #2255746
I understand what you're saying, but in Av mode, you can still use your Av+/- button to adjust the exposure compensation to +/- 2 stops, so for most practical purposes, doesn't aperture priority offer about as much "control" as manual mode?

cwphoto wrote in post #2255766
Not if the reflectance of your subject is changing.

In the "olden days" reflected light meters used to frequently be much more sensitive to some colors than others.

I presumed that this carried through to today's meters and wondered if my presumption was correct. I just got off the phone with Sekonic's tech support, and they confirmed that their meters respond to all visible colors equally well in reflected mode.

However, this does not mean that a dark green and a bright yellow will provide the same readings under the same light. That's because the dark green actually reflects far less light than the bright yellow.

When shooting a variety of subjects in the same light in rapid succession such as the portraits I took of kids sitting in their race cars - all with very different paint jobs and different clothing colors on the kids - it helps to have measured the light source and locked the camera to one exposure value. Same goes for weddings with the bight whites, dark blacks, and everything in between for the clothing people are wearing.

I don't know why someone would go on a "rant" over this. If you don't want to use M, don't use M. I use M and spot meter almost exclusively. Why? Well, I've been doing this a long time and used to shoot mainly low speed, high contrast slide film. In my opinion you can't rely on full screen meters, even the evaluative type for every scene. The technique I used has become intuitive with me. I selectively meter something to get a general reading. It doesn't have to be in the scene, but something my eye and knowledge tells me will give me the range of exposure that I want. This probably goes back to the reading I've done in years past about the zone system. I never really got into it, but I did contemplate getting a zone-calibrated meter so I must have absorbed some of it.
So why is this good? Once I get a reading that I believe will render the scene the way I like it, I don't have to worry about the half press changing that exposure. Remember the meter is using reflected light. When I include an object with less reflectance, I want that object to be dark because that's what I see. A dark object. With M I don't have to worry about the camera changing the setting based on what it sees, either the evaluated frame, the center weighting, the partial spot, or the spot. For me this is a much faster method than fiddling with the wheels and/or exposure compensation for every shot.
A simple, very basic example. I hope you've all heard of the sunny 16 rule. Before I had my DSLR I used a PRO-1 for my travel camera. I set C1 (Custom setup 1) to this rule so that at start up it went to ISO x 2 @ f8.0 (PRO-1 doesn't have f16). Since most of my shots are travel related outdoors, this meant that when the camera powered up it was ready to shoot for that situation. I could then make minor adjustments depending on what I wanted the main subject to be, but I did not have to meter every shot. For me, this is the best way to work. I just feel that I have better control, understanding of what the exposure is going to do, and don't have to fiddle as much. Try it out.

Marquis Photos wrote in post #2255688
You have much more control over how your image will look in manual.

That is flat wrong. I don't know how else to put it. What exactly is it that you think you have control over in M that you don't have in (for example) Av? Both allow you to chose your focal length, your focus point, your ISO, your aperture, and to use the full 4 stops of the on-board light-meter to determine the shutter speed that will get you the exposure you wish.

Please respond ... I'm overly intrigued.

Bill

Patrick S wrote in post #2255746
I understand what you're saying, but in Av mode, you can still use your Av+/- button to adjust the exposure compensation to +/- 2 stops, so for most practical purposes, doesn't aperture priority offer about as much "control" as manual mode?

Yes ... exactly!

Bill

Bill Ng wrote in post #2255952
That is flat wrong. I don't know how else to put it. What exactly is it that you think you have control over in M that you don't have in (for example) Av? Both allow you to chose your focal length, your focus point, your ISO, your aperture, and to use the full 4 stops of the on-board light-meter to determine the shutter speed that will get you the exposure you wish.

Please respond ... I'm overly intrigued.

Bill

In theory you're right, but in practice there are situations when you don't have the time to adjust the exposure compensation dial/button when your subject's reflectance changes.

Manual takes all that away albeit at the expense of having to adjust your EV when the lighting changes. There are compromises both ways and each can be a valid choice depending on your conditions really.

Choice is good, no?

cwphoto wrote in post #2255766
Not if the reflectance of your subject is changing.

You do understand you've just proven the point that M kinda sucks yes? Let's take your example. I'm shooting a portrait of a great-looking Asian woman (my wife). She's pale skinned, so I know I want to over-expose about 2/3rds of a stop above what the light meter reads to expose her face properly.

I'm in M mode, I have plenty of light so I go with ISO 100. I want a heavily blurred background and I like shallow depth of field so I set my aperture to f/2.8. I point the camera at her face, half depress the shutter, and I rotate the dial around for my shutter speed until that little mark is sitting on +2/3rds. While I'm doing this, a cloud rolls in a reduces my available light by 4 stops of light. Now I'm WAY underexposed. So I roll the dial around again until I'm seeing +2/3rds. I recompose, I shoot.

Now lets see the same situation in Av mode.

I'm in Av mode, I have plenty of light so I go with ISO 100. I want a heavily blurred background and I like shallow depth of field so I set my aperture to f/2.8. I set my exposure compensation to +2/3rds, I point the camera at her face, recompose and I shoot. What ever the lighting was at the time I hit the shutter ... that's the exposure I got. The light could be changing quite quickly, it wouldn't make a bit of a difference to me because as soon as I hit the button, I'm ready to fire.

In both M and Av mode, the shots were taken at EXACTLY the same settings because the same amount of light existed ... but I did it in much less time and I didn't have to worry about any lighting changes that might occur in the time it takes my to put that little mark exactly where I want it.

Bill

M for flash or when i want to achieve a desired effect, other than that its between AV and TV.

Bill Ng wrote in post #2255986
You do understand you've just proven the point that M kinda sucks yes? Let's take your example. I'm shooting a portrait of a great-looking Asian woman (my wife). She's pale skinned, so I know I want to over-expose about 2/3rds of a stop above what the light meter reads to expose her face properly.

I'm in M mode, I have plenty of light so I go with ISO 100. I want a heavily blurred background and I like shallow depth of field so I set my aperture to f/2.8. I point the camera at her face, half depress the shutter, and I rotate the dial around for my shutter speed until that little mark is sitting on +2/3rds. While I'm doing this, a cloud rolls in a reduces my available light by 4 stops of light. Now I'm WAY underexposed. So I roll the dial around again until I'm seeing +2/3rds. I recompose, I shoot.

Now lets see the same situation in Av mode.

I'm in Av mode, I have plenty of light so I go with ISO 100. I want a heavily blurred background and I like shallow depth of field so I set my aperture to f/2.8. I set my exposure compensation to +2/3rds, I point the camera at her face, recompose and I shoot. What ever the lighting was at the time I hit the shutter ... that's the exposure I got. The light could be changing quite quickly, it wouldn't make a bit of a difference to me because as soon as I hit the button, I'm ready to fire.

In both M and Av mode, the shots were taken at EXACTLY the same settings because the same amount of light existed ... but I did it in much less time and I didn't have to worry about any lighting changes that might occur in the time it takes my to put that little mark exactly where I want it.

Bill

I'll give you another example:

I'm shooting motor racing under a clear blue sky. The sun is behind both me and my subject/scene.

The cars come in all different colours and shades. Some are black, some are white, some are green, some are red, yadda, yadda.

In 'M' mode, I simply do a sunny-16 rule and set my Av and Tv according to my creative goals and shoot. If a black car comes around the corner my image is unaffected by the error my internal meter will read by the subject's non-18% grey reflectance - same as the white car, and the green car, and the red car.

But in 'Av' or 'Tv' mode I must adjust my exposure compensation whenever a non-18% reflective car comes around the corner to satisfy correct exposure. Unfortunately by the time I've fumbled with the dial/button and adjusted what I think is the right amount I've missed the shot. Oh well, hopefully it wasn't a 'money-shot'.

See what I mean? Horses for courses - it's not always the lighting that can change quickly on you but the subject can too...

KCMO Al wrote in post #2255948
I don't know why someone would go on a "rant" over this. If you don't want to use M, don't use M. I use M and spot meter almost exclusively. Why? Well, I've been doing this a long time and used to shoot mainly low speed, high contrast slide film. In my opinion you can't rely on full screen meters, even the evaluative type for every scene. The technique I used has become intuitive with me. I selectively meter something to get a general reading. It doesn't have to be in the scene, but something my eye and knowledge tells me will give me the range of exposure that I want. This probably goes back to the reading I've done in years past about the zone system. I never really got into it, but I did contemplate getting a zone-calibrated meter so I must have absorbed some of it.
So why is this good? Once I get a reading that I believe will render the scene the way I like it, I don't have to worry about the half press changing that exposure. Remember the meter is using reflected light. When I include an object with less reflectance, I want that object to be dark because that's what I see. A dark object. With M I don't have to worry about the camera changing the setting based on what it sees, either the evaluated frame, the center weighting, the partial spot, or the spot. For me this is a much faster method than fiddling with the wheels and/or exposure compensation for every shot.
A simple, very basic example. I hope you've all heard of the sunny 16 rule. Before I had my DSLR I used a PRO-1 for my travel camera. I set C1 (Custom setup 1) to this rule so that at start up it went to ISO x 2 @ f8.0 (PRO-1 doesn't have f16). Since most of my shots are travel related outdoors, this meant that when the camera powered up it was ready to shoot for that situation. I could then make minor adjustments depending on what I wanted the main subject to be, but I did not have to meter every shot. For me, this is the best way to work. I just feel that I have better control, understanding of what the exposure is going to do, and don't have to fiddle as much. Try it out.

The difference between bright daylight and partial could coverage is typically in the vicinity of 5 stops of light ... the difference between daylight at noon and daylight 1 hour before sunset is typically 3 stops of light. If you're eyes are as trained as you say they are .... fantastic for you, I applaud you (seriously) and you will be fine.

For the 99.9% of us that can't do that ... Av will work just great. You fall into the category of "external light meter". It may not be a Sekonic you're using, but you're not using the internal light meter which perfectly explains your love of, and subsequent use of, M mode. Most of us do not use external light meters (in our heads, or purchased from a store) in our everyday shooting, so M is a waste of time.

The problem is that some people seem to think M is some sort of goal ... once you can get there, you are a "good photographer" or something. There are people on these forums who boast, in their signature, about using "M" all the time. What is that? I like to do more work than is necessary and slow myself down .... aren't you proud of me? Talk about self praise of mediocrity.

For those of you shooting without flash and using the internal light meter ... M offers you no more control than Av or Tv, both of which are faster to use. I'm still waiting for someone to prove me wrong on this.

Bill

KCMO Al wrote in post #2255948
I don't know why someone would go on a "rant" over this.

ditto....

Bill Ng wrote in post #2255986
I'm shooting a portrait of a great-looking Asian woman (my wife). She's pale skinned, so I know I want to over-expose about 2/3rds of a stop above what the light meter reads to expose her face properly.

Bill, when measuring the lighting of a simple portrait or a simple outdoor scene with an incident meter you usually don't have to "over-expose" or "under-expose" anything to get absolutely correct exposures. Merely measure the light falling on the subject (which is what an incident light meter does), adjust the camera settings accordingly, and shoot.

If you're using manual mode, you will more than likely have already chosen an ISO value and either the aperture or shutter speed that you want to use for creative purposes. All that is left is to dial in the third value and shoot. It's that simple. There's no guessing involved. It's a workflow that works, and it has worked for decades.

Teaching somebody about photography exposure basics is far simpler if the teacher and the student use a handheld meter and manual settings on a camera. Once the student has acquired the basics, then automation - and how to control it - can be taught/learned.

Bill Ng wrote in post #2256023
The difference between bright daylight and partial could coverage is typically in the vicinity of 5 stops of light ... the difference between daylight at noon and daylight 1 hour before sunset is typically 3 stops of light. If you're eyes are as trained as you say they are .... fantastic for you, I applaud you (seriously) and you will be fine.

For the 99.9% of us that can't do that ... Av will work just great. You fall into the category of "external light meter". It may not be a Sekonic you're using, but you're not using the internal light meter which perfectly explains your love of, and subsequent use of, M mode. Most of us do not use external light meters (in our heads, or purchased from a store) in our everyday shooting, so M is a waste of time.

The problem is that some people seem to think M is some sort of goal ... once you can get there, you are a "good photographer" or something. There are people on these forums who boast, in their signature, about using "M" all the time. What is that? I like to do more work than is necessary and slow myself down .... aren't you proud of me? Talk about self praise of mediocrity.

For those of you shooting without flash and using the internal light meter ... M offers you no more control than Av or Tv, both of which are faster to use. I'm still waiting for someone to prove me wrong on this.

Bill

Look, most of what you say has merit - particularly the bit about M being useless for 99% or thereabouts.

But to just address your last paragraph; even without flash and an external light meter M can be useful. An example would be to use the reflected meter to peg the highlights in a scene (say a bride in her dress) and work from there.

For many of us this is an intuitive way of working and just another way of skinning the same cat.

SkipD wrote in post #2256055
Bill, when measuring the lighting of a simple portrait or a simple outdoor scene with an incident meter you usually don't have to "over-expose" or "under-expose" anything to get absolutely correct exposures. Merely measure the light falling on the subject (which is what an incident light meter does), adjust the camera settings accordingly, and shoot.

If you're using manual mode, you will more than likely have already chosen an ISO value and either the aperture or shutter speed that you want to use for creative purposes. All that is left is to dial in the third value and shoot. It's that simple. There's no guessing involved. It's a workflow that works, and it has worked for decades.

Teaching somebody about photography exposure basics is far simpler if the teacher and the student use a handheld meter and manual settings on a camera. Once the student has acquired the basics, then automation - and how to control it - can be taught/learned.

I think we must have learned from the same hymn book Skip!

cwphoto wrote in post #2256011
I'll give you another example:

I'm shooting motor racing under a clear blue sky. The sun is behind both me and my subject/scene.

The cars come in all different colours and shades. Some are black, some are white, some are green, some are red, yadda, yadda.

In 'M' mode, I simply do a sunny-16 rule and set my Av and Tv according to my creative goals and shoot. If a black car comes around the corner my image is unaffected by the error my internal meter will read by the subject's non-18% grey reflectance - same as the white car, and the green car, and the red car.

But in 'Av' or 'Tv' mode I must adjust my exposure compensation whenever a non-18% reflective car comes around the corner to satisfy correct exposure. Unfortunately by the time I've fumbled with the dial/button and adjusted what I think is the right amount I've missed the shot. Oh well, hopefully it wasn't a 'money-shot'.

See what I mean? Horses for courses - it's not always the lighting that can change quickly on you but the subject can too...

Good example, and on an atmospherically generous day, you'd be in the correct for using M mode at that time ... but what happens if you're race day has partial cloud coverage that's changing constantly?

Thinking about this more, it would be interesting to know where you are from? I'm on the east coast of the US and my weather conditions/cloud coverage changes constantly. There are a surprisingly few amount of clear days each year out here. The norm is partial cloud coverage where the lighting can change all the time. But I know from a few west coast vacations that you guys and gals can pretty much rely on it being a bright ... cloudless ... day. As I look out the windows right now, I've got one giant gray cloud that covers literally, as far as my eye can see.

As I said earlier, your argument is a good one. I will speculate however, that shooting varying brightly colored 100mph+ objects is not a large % of the photography on this forum, and for the majority of subjects (who I would imagine stand pretty still while their photos are being taken) ... Av/Tv will work just fine.

Bill

Bill