Anyone got a rational explanation why Canon underexposes?

here's a link for exposing to the right: https://photography-on-the.net …ght=exposure+to​+the+right

Here is a random sample.

Av mode, zero FEC, zero EC. Flash on ETTL.

ISO 250.

In my books this is slightly underexposed.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

cosworth wrote in post #2389974
Here is a random sample.

Av mode, zero FEC, zero EC. Flash on ETTL.

ISO 250.

In my books this is slightly underexposed.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

think it is spot on. If I look at he scene, the ratio of darks to light it seems on da money.

I assume she's got a serious tan; the colours of the top and skirt look good, as do the paddle and her wristlet. If it's under, the reflection off the metal (panel edges, table edge) may be a factor. But, absent the original scene to compare it to, it looks good to me, too.

Hmm. I would have gone into input levels and popped it up to 0,1.00,230.

Have I fallen prey to the tourist trap of overexposed photos like I chastise my wife for?

cosworth wrote in post #2390037
Have I fallen prey to the tourist trap of overexposed photos like I chastise my wife for?

Sounds like your prehaps adapting to your market, nothing wrong with that.


I always thought auto exposure problems were because the world isn't 18% grey.

Well I am a student of "histogram repair" to right my own wrongs. Maybe I'll stop it and stop my exposure creep.

cosworth wrote in post #2384226
Set your camera in auto mode and fire away. Set the flash with zero FEC and fire away. The camera underexposes. Underexposes by a fair bit.

I spent some time this weekend reading a lot of Canon literature and couldn't really pin anytihng down other than "be on the safe side" and don't blow stuff out.

I have found the M mode getting a hell of a lot more uage from me lately since I and growing discouraged with the interpretation of the metering modes that the Av, Tv modes do.

My FEC is ALWAYS cranked up +1 or more in ETTL. Once the sun goes down the exposure comp goes way up.

Now I've not used any high end Nikon stuff, just a D100 that was literally garbage and awkward to use. Does Nikon have as much as a tendency to expose to the left as well?

Considering Canon views the megapixel wars over and they are on top, can we see more advances in metering technology along the rush to ISO 10000000?

I checked my 20D ambient and flash metering and found it to be spot on.

I think there are two effects, which people interpret as underexposure:

1. Light fall off so that things in the background appear underexposed.
2. Fill Flash Mode. If the ambient light level is at certain EV levels then Tv and Av seem to cause underexposure of the flash as the metering system tries to balance both.

If you are having better luck with M mode then I suspect 2 may be what you are seeing.

This link may be of interest if you have not seen it before.
http://photonotes.org/​articles/eos-flash/

cosworth wrote in post #2389974
Here is a random sample.

Av mode, zero FEC, zero EC. Flash on ETTL.

ISO 250.

In my books this is slightly underexposed.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

This looks about right to me. If you put the info tool on greyscale over the subject, her skin and top are around mid grey.

Couple of observations, the white edge of the table (closer than subject too) and specula flash reflection in the glass behind might be fooling the meter slightly. The red bat looks like the red channel is not far off clipping anyway.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #2390203
This looks about right to me. If you put the info tool on greyscale over the subject, her skin and top are around mid grey.

Couple of observations, the white edge of the table (closer than subject too) and specula flash reflection in the glass behind might be fooling the meter slightly. The red bat looks like the red channel is not far off clipping anyway.

Like the others said looks spot on exposurewise (for the player i.e. the subject)

the light fall of ( again as others have said ) may give the impression that the background is underexposed, but again I'd say the main subject (the woman ) is bang on

Moppie wrote in post #2390065
.......

I always thought auto exposure problems were because the world isn't 18% grey.

The weather we've had lately would contradict that statement Moppie!!

kevin_c wrote in post #2390735
The weather we've had lately would contradict that statement Moppie!!

I should have added a condition: "I always thought auto exposure problems were because the world isn't 18% grey, unless you live in the UK."

Maybe thats the problem, we need "British" and "Non-British" metering modes?

Exposure one right from the camera:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

That shot's not too bad. I might tweak it up a little but it's a matter of taste at that point.

In this case, the mirrored background was not reflecting flash back to the camera and E-TTL properly identified the subject.

Put her in front of a wall and shoot her, and the results will be different. Especially if the wall is light colored.