Technically correct exposures on d7100

[Derrel]

There is a reason that Fine Tune Optimal Exposure exists. It was designed as a feature for critical workers who wish to fine-tune the optimal exposure setting. There is a reason setting b5 SURVIVES the two-button re-set. There is a reason it does NOT show up via in-finder indicators, and is entirely separate from Exposure Compensation settings. There are reasons that cameras have spot, matrix, and center-weighted metering patterns.

When you're wrong about something, or you feel somebody has shown you up, don't make excuses... just accept the fact that Nikon itself has incorporated a fine-tuning mechanism into their cameras, and there are reasons it works exactly as it works.

Same thing with the way Nikon allows users to adjust the size of the metering sensitivity circle--allowing individual users to adjust their cameras in multiple ways is the way "advanced" equipment and "advanced workers" like things to be.

 

[ratssass]

i'd say im probably 90% matrix,8%center,and on rare occasions,spot.All allegedly under-exposed according to software.....trust the light meter/camera meter or the software.Quite honestly,i put less stock in the software.

 

[KmH]

The EC (Exposure Compensation) setting does not change when the camera is powered off.

The OP may discover they had at some point in the past inadvertently set -1 EV of EC that is causing the constant under exposure.
But, being consumer electronics it is entirely possible to get a camera that consistently shoots under exposed.
That's why the EC setting does not reset to 0 when the camera is powered off.

Also true is that since the camera light meter is calibrated based on the assumption normal scenes have an average reflectance equal to 12% to 18%, the camera will not accurately meter all scenes. The photographer has to apply some judgement as to if some +/- EC needs to be dialed in when a scene is more, or less, reflective than normal.
That's why the +/- EC button is right next to the shutter button too.

As mentioned, the metering mode used is a factor, and not all parts of a photo will be 'correctly' exposed regardless the metering mode and exposure settings used.

So what it boils down to is the photographer has to understand how the camera works and has to be familiar with all the controls and features the camera offers for making photographs.
Exposure Compensation is one of the more critical controls a photographer needs to be familiar with pretty much as soon as they get their camera.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-metering.htm

 

[apaflo]

i'd say im probably 90% matrix,8%center,and on rare occasions,spot.All allegedly under-exposed according to software.....trust the light meter/camera meter or the software.Quite honestly,i put less stock in the software.

It's almost certain that your camera is very accurate... and so is your software! They are actually looking at two different things.

The camera is measuring light, and with that measurement you configure the camera for a specific exposure. That produces a sensor signal that corresponds to some level of image brightness which also depends on all sorts of configuration options other than exposure. Sensor data saved in a RAW file has been adjusted very little (ISO sensitivity is about the only configuration option that has been applied). But when an image is generated with a RAW converter there are several other configuration options that will change the brightness of the image you eventually work on with an editor or see with a viewer.

As a result it can be very difficult to judge from the RGB image data (which incidentally is what the camera's histogram is generated from, and it can be just as inaccurate). It is possible to either over or under expose in terms of where the RAW data values are when adjusting by judging from the RGB values. Usually the result makes the RGB look overexposed, but it can be the other way too. The significance is that with default settings the camera probably does not clip highlights in the RAW data when that is not showing up in the JPEG generated histogram.

This business of re-calibrating a light meter is a lot more complex than it initially appears. Tweek the wrong parameter for the right reason and you may suffer consequences without realizing it. But it is safe, particularly with newer cameras that have a dynamic range much higher than either a JPEG or print can possibly display, to slightly under expose from 0 to -1 EV and then correct for it when adjusting gamma and brightness during the RAW conversion process (whether done in camera or as post processing).

Pick the right place to make adjustments, where the chances of it being a little wrong are less likely to be a serious error. And to some degree that is why Nikon does not suggest using light meter fne tuning over Exposure Compensation.

 

[ratssass]

...ok.Let me run this by you.In manual mode,there is no EC other than increasing to the plus side,through any combo of shutter,aperture or ISO,correct?That aside,is the software looking at the file globally,when it really only needs to compensate locally?

 

[apaflo]

...ok.Let me run this by you.In manual mode,there is no EC other than increasing to the plus side,through any combo of shutter,aperture or ISO,correct?That aside,is the software looking at the file globally,when it really only needs to compensate locally?

I don't understand what you are saying. In manual exposure mode, EC works just like it does in other modes and can be set plus or minus. It changes the light meter reading. Because it is in manual mode it doesn't change shutter speed or aperture. ISO will change automatically only if AutoISO is set to ON.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "globally" and "locally" in terms of the software's view. Software looks at all or part of an image depending on how you configure the software. Unless you purposely restrict what it looks at, it affects the entire image.

 

[robbins.photo]

There is a reason that Fine Tune Optimal Exposure exists. It was designed as a feature for critical workers who wish to fine-tune the optimal exposure setting.

So wait, your assertion here is tha the reason Fine Tune Optimal exposure exists is for people who wish to fine tune the optimal exposure settings?

Derrel.. geez. Where do you come up with this stuff. Honestly. Ok, have you got any Nikon white papers or some other form of proof? Heck I'd even go with a note from your mom on this one! Or is this just another one of those crazy put on your tinfoil hat consipracy theories?

Lol..

 

[sk66]

With my previous Nikons I always had a +.7 EC set as the default. With many Canons it was a -.5 EC. Don't know why exactly, just the way they were programmed as opposed to what I wanted. I could have set a global fine tune and reset EC to 0, but I never felt the need. My current Nikons are set to 0 by default w/o fine tune.

It may be that the cameras are offset towards slight underexposure by default... they are, the reported ISO is always higher than the actual sensitivity to light. This is done in order to protect the images from the harsh highlight clipping character of a digital sensor, and it may be done *more* in lower level cameras.

"Correct exposure" is based upon the REI, "recommended exposure index." This amounts to "whatever they feel like making it." Even in the days of film we would offset the ISO/ASA in order to get what we wanted from the camera as opposed to what they recommended.

The point is, if *you* feel the camera is always too dark, set the exposure higher however you feel like doing it. Neither the camera nor the software is "right," there is no such thing as "right." (but there *is* such a thing as completely blown out...)

 

[ratssass]

...thank you all that took the time to give valuable input,and I apologize to the OP for hijacking the thread.Just realized I did that.I've always been happy with the exposure the in camera meter provides.Just thought it odd that 2 different programs want to expose it more.Lightroom 4,usually just a little,but PSP13 quite a bit.