Reading mode: Light Dark

Brand New 400D/xti Underexposure problems :(

Go to last post
art1sta said:
By the way can anyone please tell me if your camera had a
protection on the screen.
Click to expand...
None of my Canon cameras have come with protection on the screen. Keep in mind that what you see is the protected cover of the LCD. It's inexpensive to replace.

Olga
 
If those pics are the result obtained in an auto mode (where you've let the camera select the settings such as P, Av, or TV) then you don't have an underexposing problem you have a faulty camera, plain and simple.

To understand exposure according to the metering your camera uses look at the little green grid inder the image through the viewfinder, it will look something like -2~ -1~ 0~ +1~ +2, obviously best I can do with the basic keyboard but you'll get the idea, under the grid is a little pointer, if it's at either end and flashing it's heavily under or overexposing, if it's under the 0 it's metered evenly to give a good overall neutral image according to the cameras metering system.

If the pointer is steady under the +1 it's one stop overexposed if steady under the -1 it's one stop underexposed and so on, if you let the camera make the decisions it will always expose so that the pointer is under the 0 unless you tell it otherwise.
 
Firstly thankyou to everyone for all your help.

I have been testing my 400D for the past 3 hours and have tabulated my results. (forgive the formatting i done the best I could to convert into text file from excel)
    1. Test Environment ##
----------------------

Shot taken inside bedroom, yellow lighting, and cloudy day with window open. (I deliberitly chose this condition to test the camera). I used the histogram and visual observation for exposure checks. Camera was set to Evaluative Metering for all shots when possible. I set ISO to 1600 whenever I could as I was not concerned about noise and wasn't in the best lighting.

Please do critic my testing if it's faulty or I've overlooked something. I have attached an image of each mode after it's results.

Mode ISO Shutter Aperature EC Result

No Flash Auto Auto Auto Auto Underexposed
Night Auto Auto Auto Auto Underexposed
Sport Auto Auto Auto Auto Underexposed
Macro Auto Auto Auto Auto Underexposed
Landscape Auto Auto Auto Auto Underexposed
Portrait Auto Auto Auto Auto Underexposed
Full Auto Auto Auto Auto Auto Underexposed

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/312389530/

P Mode 100 Auto (1/125) Auto (7.1) 2/3+ Underexposed
P Mode 200 Auto (1/200) Auto (9) 2/3+ Underexposed
P Mode 400 Auto (1/250) Auto (10) 2/3+ Underexposed
P Mode 800 Auto (1/400) Auto (13) 2/3+ Underexposed
P Mode 1600 Auto (1/500) Auto (14) 2/3+ Underexposed

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/312389535/

Tv Mode 1600 2.5 Auto (22) 2/3+ Overexposed
Tv Mode 1600 1 Auto (22) 2/3+ Overexposed
Tv Mode 1600 1/4 Auto (22) 2/3+ Dim
Tv Mode 1600 1/20 Auto (22) 2/3+ Extremely Dim
Tv Mode 1600 1/125 Auto (22) 2/3+ Underexposed
Tv Mode 1600 1/250 Auto (22) 2/3+ Underexposed
Tv Mode 1600 1/500 Auto (16) 2/3+ Underexposed
Tv Mode 1600 1/1600 Auto (9.0) 2/3+ Underexposed

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/312389541/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/312389539/

Av Mode 1600 Auto (1/4000) 4.0 2/3+ Underexposed
Av Mode 1600 Auto (1/4000) 5 2/3+ Underexposed
Av Mode 1600 Auto (1/4000) 5.6 2/3+ Underexposed
Av Mode 1600 Auto (1/1000) 11 2/3+ Underexposed
Av Mode 1600 Auto (1/640) 14 2/3+ Underexposed
Av Mode 1600 Auto (1/250) 22 2/3+ Underexposed

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/312389529/

M Mode 1600 2.5 4.5 2+? Ovreexposed
M Mode 1600 1 4.5 2+? Ovreexposed
M Mode 1600 1/20 4.5 2+? Ovreexposed
M Mode 1600 1/12 4.5 2+? Underexposed (dim)
M Mode 1600 1/80 4.5 2+? Exposure good (slightly dim)
M Mode 1600 1/60 4.5 2+? Exposure good (slightly dim)
M Mode 1600 1/100 4.5 2+? Underexposed (dim)
M Mode 1600 1/250 4.5 2+? Underexposed
M Mode 1600 1/500 4.5 2+? Underexposed
M Mode 1600 1/1000 4.5 2+? Underexposed

M Mode 1600 1/50 4.5 2+? Perfect Correct exposure.
M Mode 1600 1/50 5.6 2+? Exposure good (slightly dim)
M Mode 1600 1/50 8 2+? Underexposed
M Mode 1600 1/50 14 2+? Underexposed
M Mode 1600 1/50 22 2+? Underexposed

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/312389533/

Out of the approaximately 40 tests I conducted, I was able to get ONE perfect/correct exposure shot. (M Mode - ISO 1600, 1/50, f/4.5) based on the histogram and my observation.

Your feedback would be most welcome as to what I should do from here. Is it still my camera skills or is my camera faulty? Thankyou.
 
Mbaddah said:
Out of the approaximately 40 tests I conducted, I was able to get
ONE perfect/correct exposure shot. (M Mode - ISO 1600, 1/50, f/4.5)
based on the histogram and my observation.
Click to expand...
If the above setting was fine, but if when you used AV at 4.0, the camera gave you a shutter of 1/4000, return your camera to the store you bought it from. It is defective.

Olga
 
Did you use the flash for indoor shots? Where did you focus - the darker areas or the window?
--
Misha
 
misha said:
Did you use the flash for indoor shots? Where did you focus - the
darker areas or the window?
--
Misha
Click to expand...
No I didn't (hence the reason why I bumped the ISO to 1600). Although even with the flash it still looked horrible. I'm really upset its a defective unit as I really like the camera but unfortunately the store said it was the last one :(

So it's most likely a defective unit, great start to my DSLR career!

Thanks everyone for your help,hopefully if I replace with new unit it ain't a defect as well. Is it common for 400D's to be defective like this?
 
Mbaddah said:
it ain't a defect as well. Is it common for 400D's to be defective
like this?
Click to expand...
Not common but on occasion you hear of defective cameras; not necessarily of the metering that you have encountered. If you cannot return it, Canon should be able to correct it.

Olga
 
Interesting response. Yes, I did read the original post

I decided to believe Mbaddah when he(?) said "I have tried every setting possible and all come out like your looking through triple glazed tinted windows (infact much worse), except when in Manual Mode, and even then still underexposed."

My 'summary' was intended to be of help in collating the various replies this type of post generates. I tried very hard to be factual in that post. If I got anything wrong and let subjectivity creep in, well, none of us are perfect. It's just that there is so much repetition about topics like this and I thought I could bring Mbaddah up to steam quickly. (I appreciate people who have done that for me e.g. Doug Pardee).

Anyway, I now see that the conclusion of this thread seems to be 'the camera is faulty' and the content of my earlier post and the advice given at the end of it, doesn't seem to be too much at adds with that view.

Just trying to help.

--
JohnB47
 
JohnB47 said:
Interesting response. Yes, I did read the original post

I decided to believe Mbaddah when he(?) said "I have tried every
setting possible and all come out like your looking through triple
glazed tinted windows (infact much worse), except when in Manual
Mode, and even then still underexposed."

My 'summary' was intended to be of help in collating the various
replies this type of post generates. I tried very hard to be
factual in that post. If I got anything wrong and let subjectivity
creep in, well, none of us are perfect. It's just that there is so
much repetition about topics like this and I thought I could bring
Mbaddah up to steam quickly. (I appreciate people who have done
that for me e.g. Doug Pardee).

Anyway, I now see that the conclusion of this thread seems to be
'the camera is faulty' and the content of my earlier post and the
advice given at the end of it, doesn't seem to be too much at adds
with that view.

Just trying to help.

--
JohnB47
Click to expand...
Thankyou for trying, still was much appreciated :)
 
I replaced my 400D with another one from a different store (the store I originally purchased from had no other stock). WHAT A DIFFERENCE! You guys were right it was a defective unit.

Here are some shots again in my room (with even worse lighting) yet the exposure speaks for itself :)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883726/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883724/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883723/

I know nothing spectacular just wanted to test the 50mm 1.8 lens (I love!) and the exposure of the camera. They were shot at ISO 1600 and I didn't notice any noise at all!!!!
 
I am thinking about doing this with my camera. I am not yet convinced it doesn't have issues.

My question for you is when you have "EC", did you add that compensation for P, Tv, and Av modes?

Thanks.
 
Mbaddah said:
I replaced my 400D with another one from a different store (the
store I originally purchased from had no other stock). WHAT A
DIFFERENCE! You guys were right it was a defective unit.

Here are some shots again in my room (with even worse lighting) yet
the exposure speaks for itself :)
Click to expand...
Glad you are happy with the differences. But my observations of your photos on the histogram in CS2 is that only one is spot on. The first is under exposed, the second is over exposed and the camera got the third one spot on.
Mbaddah said:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883726/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883724/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883723/
Click to expand...
*************************************************************
Packy

http://homepage.eircom.net/~vmax ; for my pic stuff
 
packy said:
packy said:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883726/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883724/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64593563@N00/313883723/
Click to expand...
*************************************************************
Packy

http://homepage.eircom.net/~vmax ; for my pic stuff
Click to expand...
Thankyou for the feedback. For the one that is overexposed it's kind of my fault as I not only had fired the flash but ISO was set to 1600, so looking back I kind of expect it (Correct me if i'm wrong).

As for the underexposed shot, it does look slightly underexposed. Perhaps I should have increased exposure compensation, fired dim flash, played with white balance or something. But was still very close to room colour, and believe me alot better than my previous 400D :)

Thanks for the observation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top