D100 metering problem

[Larry54084]

I have taken 200-300 pictures with the D100 and the 24-85 f2.8-f4 D lens. Many of these have been experimental comparison - same landscape, same amount of sky, various settings. When set on matrix metering, the pictures seem consisently dark and contrasty- underexposed. To get anything acceptable, I have to advance the EV setting to +.3 and cut down on the contrast.

Is anyone else having this exposure problem? I have used Nikons for years - both film and digital (990 was great for general purposes). I would appreciate your observations and suggestions. It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[GoldenHammer]

approach on DSLRs on the matrix metering to avoid over-exposure pictures...

GH
--



姿彩生活新世紀 - Life Style 21
http://www.life-style-21.com/forums/
Nikon D1x, AF 28mm/f1.4D, AF 85mm/f1.4D, AFS 300mm/f4D

 

[GoldenHammer]

approach on DSLR to avoid over exposured...

(I think my previous reply corrupted)

GH
--



姿彩生活新世紀 - Life Style 21
http://www.life-style-21.com/forums/
Nikon D1x, AF 28mm/f1.4D, AF 85mm/f1.4D, AFS 300mm/f4D

 

[SpinThis!]

In digital it's always better to be underexposed than over because a lot of the time the detail is still there in the shadows. If you blow out the highlights there's no way to regain that detail back. I've found a lot of the time, detail still exists in the dark shadow areas. You can always fix this in PS (or another program).

--
Dave

 

[Nancy Ann]

I concur that to error on the side of underexposure is more forgiving than overexposure, but I also acknowledge that many of the point and shoot type shots and even those where I'll fidget to find the good optimization of f-stop/aperture, shutter speed and sensitivity, the D100 seems to exhibit a sporatic range of exposures in automatic mode.

I'm generally using a Sigma 20mm f1.8 lense, but have seen similar reports with Nikkor/Nikon glass.

One important note, which I kick myself in the butt regarding is to read the stinking documentation on the camera. I'm as guilty of ths as anybody. Note that the rear command wheel and the front subcommand wheel might get easily incremented when walking around offering different equivalent exposure aperature/shutter speed combinations or the ISO may have been preset to a wildly out of range value earlier. I'll still have to go back and essentially treat these values manually and double chack a few exposures just to make sure all my shots aren't grossly underexposed.

It's also a bit frustrating to have to PC process each shot before saving to CD.

It would be nice to display the software logic or sequence of operation for it's automatic exposure control in a drilldown path on the info screens.

For myself, I'll seem to shoot several shots seemingly regular and well exposed and then out of the blue, 4-5 shots come up with virtually nothing observable until gamma'd up to about 2.38.

Best solution I've found has been to double check the exposure in the monitor and reset some default values. Sure would help to have a prismatic viewfinder though to assist or reassure the focus.

In digital it's always better to be underexposed than over because
a lot of the time the detail is still there in the shadows. If you
blow out the highlights there's no way to regain that detail back.
I've found a lot of the time, detail still exists in the dark
shadow areas. You can always fix this in PS (or another program).

--
Dave

 

[Jusko]

My D100 also produces underexposed pics. So, I have to set it to +0.7ev in order to get the pics properly exposed.

For ext. flash, I have to set my SB26 to f5.6, and the D100 set to f4.0 for properly exposure.

I have cross-checked the meter of the D100 with the F90X and found that the aperture reading, say if same speed, is always about one stop different. E.g. D100: 1/60, f8, then F90X : 1/60, f5.6

Best Regards
Jusko

 

[ash105802]

I think it's interesting that people are not using the transparency film analogy: All digital cameras produce first generation images exactly like colour trannie film, for which the old and sound advice is "expose for the highlights, and let the shadows take care of themselves". I have a feeling that of late, Nikon metering systems have been set up for colour neg materials, as that is what most amateurs will use. As the D100 uses a very large number of components from a conventional camera, I'm willing to bet that the metering is showing this bias. Also, in common with transparency materials digital exposures have begger all latitude!

I'm generally using a Sigma 20mm f1.8 lense, but have seen similar
reports with Nikkor/Nikon glass.

One important note, which I kick myself in the butt regarding is to
read the stinking documentation on the camera. I'm as guilty of
ths as anybody. Note that the rear command wheel and the front
subcommand wheel might get easily incremented when walking around
offering different equivalent exposure aperature/shutter speed
combinations or the ISO may have been preset to a wildly out of
range value earlier. I'll still have to go back and essentially
treat these values manually and double chack a few exposures just
to make sure all my shots aren't grossly underexposed.

It's also a bit frustrating to have to PC process each shot before
saving to CD.

It would be nice to display the software logic or sequence of
operation for it's automatic exposure control in a drilldown path
on the info screens.
For myself, I'll seem to shoot several shots seemingly regular and
well exposed and then out of the blue, 4-5 shots come up with
virtually nothing observable until gamma'd up to about 2.38.

Best solution I've found has been to double check the exposure in
the monitor and reset some default values. Sure would help to have
a prismatic viewfinder though to assist or reassure the focus.

In digital it's always better to be underexposed than over because
a lot of the time the detail is still there in the shadows. If you
blow out the highlights there's no way to regain that detail back.
I've found a lot of the time, detail still exists in the dark
shadow areas. You can always fix this in PS (or another program).

--
Dave

 

[f8&_be_there]

If the D100 is underexposing by 1 stop, then the sensitivity of the CCD
for ISO 200 should really be ISO 100. You'd then have correct exposure
but Nikon's ISO 100 would have the noise of ISO 200.

My D100 also produces underexposed pics. So, I have to set it to
+0.7ev in order to get the pics properly exposed.

For ext. flash, I have to set my SB26 to f5.6, and the D100 set to
f4.0 for properly exposure.

I have cross-checked the meter of the D100 with the F90X and found
that the aperture reading, say if same speed, is always about one
stop different. E.g. D100: 1/60, f8, then F90X : 1/60, f5.6

Best Regards
Jusko

 

[alfred_schiele]

Hi

I analyzed this too. In first I found that metering itself (center weighted / spot) equals metering with a handheld meter at the same ISO. So the camera meter itself seems ok to me.

I also recognized the tendence of too dark images in ambient (not flash only) situations. It looks like the sensor ISO is different as well as the behaviour of CCD in general. If you have more flat lighted scenery you need slight +EV while with "sparkeling" lighting you might better not using corrections. It needs some time to figure this out and I would recommend to look at the histogram display carefully within the first weeks to learn about the difference.

Regards, A. Schiele.

I have taken 200-300 pictures with the D100 and the 24-85 f2.8-f4 D
lens. Many of these have been experimental comparison - same
landscape, same amount of sky, various settings. When set on
matrix metering, the pictures seem consisently dark and contrasty-
underexposed. To get anything acceptable, I have to advance the EV
setting to +.3 and cut down on the contrast.
Is anyone else having this exposure problem? I have used Nikons
for years - both film and digital (990 was great for general
purposes). I would appreciate your observations and suggestions.
It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or
it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the
operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[alfred_schiele]

Hi

I think it's interesting that people are not using the transparency
film analogy: All digital cameras produce first generation images
exactly like colour trannie film, for which the old and sound
advice is "expose for the highlights, and let the shadows take care
of themselves". I have a feeling that of late, Nikon metering
systems have been set up for colour neg materials, as that is what
most amateurs will use. As the D100 uses a very large number of
components from a conventional camera, I'm willing to bet that the
metering is showing this bias. Also, in common with transparency
materials digital exposures have begger all latitude!

If what you suggest would be true - exposure like neg. - then we should see lots of overexposed shots instead.

All you tell does not apply to the meter itself (maybe the matrix charactereistic, but not the more conventional others) which looks quite ok to me.

So the only conclusion left is that the sensor behaves different to film, possibly closer to slide, but still different.

Regards, A. Schiele

 

[shootman]

I'm having the same problem for most indoor shots. All the shots turn out to be dark. I believe your camera setting is in Program priority mode.(suppose to be automatic) What I did was I went back to Nikon Service Centre and have it update with a software called Firmware.

You should get a better and brighter image.

shootman

ps: I've also posted recently by the name 'shootman.' There were some good replies and image for your references.

I have taken 200-300 pictures with the D100 and the 24-85 f2.8-f4 D
lens. Many of these have been experimental comparison - same
landscape, same amount of sky, various settings. When set on
matrix metering, the pictures seem consisently dark and contrasty-
underexposed. To get anything acceptable, I have to advance the EV
setting to +.3 and cut down on the contrast.
Is anyone else having this exposure problem? I have used Nikons
for years - both film and digital (990 was great for general
purposes). I would appreciate your observations and suggestions.
It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or
it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the
operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[Jusko]

Hi, shootman, did you say that you have the firmware of your D100 updated to v1.01 ?? And then the underexposure issue has then gone ??
please advise me.

Best Regards
Jusko

You should get a better and brighter image.

shootman

ps: I've also posted recently by the name 'shootman.' There were
some good replies and image for your references.

I have taken 200-300 pictures with the D100 and the 24-85 f2.8-f4 D
lens. Many of these have been experimental comparison - same
landscape, same amount of sky, various settings. When set on
matrix metering, the pictures seem consisently dark and contrasty-
underexposed. To get anything acceptable, I have to advance the EV
setting to +.3 and cut down on the contrast.
Is anyone else having this exposure problem? I have used Nikons
for years - both film and digital (990 was great for general
purposes). I would appreciate your observations and suggestions.
It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or
it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the
operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[shootman]

No, I do not have the software. I got my camera fix at the Nikon centre.
(It took about 5 minutes)

Best Regards
Jusko

You should get a better and brighter image.

shootman

ps: I've also posted recently by the name 'shootman.' There were
some good replies and image for your references.

I have taken 200-300 pictures with the D100 and the 24-85 f2.8-f4 D
lens. Many of these have been experimental comparison - same
landscape, same amount of sky, various settings. When set on
matrix metering, the pictures seem consisently dark and contrasty-
underexposed. To get anything acceptable, I have to advance the EV
setting to +.3 and cut down on the contrast.
Is anyone else having this exposure problem? I have used Nikons
for years - both film and digital (990 was great for general
purposes). I would appreciate your observations and suggestions.
It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or
it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the
operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[Jusko]

Thank you shootman. After the firmware updated, has the underexposure issue gone ??

Please advise.
Regards
Jusko

 

[John Steinbruner]

Could be the nature of the beast. Many of the posted pics have looked slightly under-exposed to me as well. I know in his review, Moose Peterson said he shot with the D100 at +.3 EV all the time.

I would appreciate your observations and suggestions.
It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or
it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the
operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[Mark S]

I had the same problem with an early D100 received July 5. I returned it and bought another D100 locally this week. The exposure values are much better. They say that v 1.01 was just white bracketing, but I don't know.

I have taken 200-300 pictures with the D100 and the 24-85 f2.8-f4 D
lens. Many of these have been experimental comparison - same
landscape, same amount of sky, various settings. When set on
matrix metering, the pictures seem consisently dark and contrasty-
underexposed. To get anything acceptable, I have to advance the EV
setting to +.3 and cut down on the contrast.
Is anyone else having this exposure problem? I have used Nikons
for years - both film and digital (990 was great for general
purposes). I would appreciate your observations and suggestions.
It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or
it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the
operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[Filip109458]

Hi

I am not satisfied with the metering of my D100 either. I have just had it and it turns out underexposed pictures all the time. I have been using the Nikon 24-120 lens for a few days now, shooting mainly in P-mode and the pictures are not what they should be: not bright, not really clear... (nothing like what I used to take with a simple Sony Cybershot S-70)...
What's wrong here?
Filip

I have taken 200-300 pictures with the D100 and the 24-85 f2.8-f4 D
lens. Many of these have been experimental comparison - same
landscape, same amount of sky, various settings. When set on
matrix metering, the pictures seem consisently dark and contrasty-
underexposed. To get anything acceptable, I have to advance the EV
setting to +.3 and cut down on the contrast.
Is anyone else having this exposure problem? I have used Nikons
for years - both film and digital (990 was great for general
purposes). I would appreciate your observations and suggestions.
It may be that the unit I bought has a bad component somewhere, or
it may be, of course, that there is something wrong with the
operator.
--
Larry Atherton

 

[Filip109458]

Hi

Do I have the same problem as some other people around here with the metering of my D100. I have been using my D100 for a few days now with the Nikon 24-120 f3.5-5.6D, snapping away in P-mode (mainly / matrix metering) and the results are not what I would expect of this camera. The pictures mostly look dull and dark - I have been used to an ordinary Sony Cybershot S70 before this D100 and most pictures turned out much more bright and clear. Even overexposing the pictures +0.3 doesn't really do the job...
What is wrong here?
Filip

 

[alfred_schiele]

Hi

I am not satisfied with the metering of my D100 either.

Did you compare to another meter? I figured out that the meter of D100 is totally right...

I think there is something not quite right with the sensors, at least with the ISO rating. Possibly Sony rushed out the first bunch of these CCD's with less QA to satisfy the demand? I had more than one defective pixel and was not pleased about this either, beond other little things I possibly had accepted in the end.

I have just
had it and it turns out underexposed pictures all the time. I have
been using the Nikon 24-120 lens for a few days now, shooting
mainly in P-mode and the pictures are not what they should be: not
bright, not really clear... (nothing like what I used to take with
a simple Sony Cybershot S-70)...
What's wrong here?

I think there is one big difference between digital cameras that can provide a live preview and D-SLR'S. With the live preview the camera can optimize exposure analyzing every individual pixel before the shot takes place while with a D-SLR this is impossible and much more guesswork, based on a more or less classical metering. CCD's are no film and behave simply different I think.

regards, A. Schiele

 

[richard allan dy]

Hi
Do I have the same problem as some other people around here with
the metering of my D100. I have been using my D100 for a few days
now with the Nikon 24-120 f3.5-5.6D, snapping away in P-mode
(mainly / matrix metering) and the results are not what I would
expect of this camera. The pictures mostly look dull and dark - I
have been used to an ordinary Sony Cybershot S70 before this D100
and most pictures turned out much more bright and clear. Even
overexposing the pictures +0.3 doesn't really do the job...
What is wrong here?
Filip

I had my d100 firmware 1.01 update, and I exposure is okay in p mode and manual mode set on ev 0.0...

I like the colors compared with my G2...