Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,956   Posts: 1,522,862   Online: 1111
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California desert
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    617

    get us

    Mechanical and electronic gizmos hate us and are out to get us. Their plot is working.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,322
    Quote Originally Posted by snapguy View Post
    Mechanical and electronic gizmos hate us and are out to get us. Their plot is working.
    Not all of us. I get along just fine with my widgets. But then, I know how they work - that's the key.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Yorkshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    720
    The variation in light levels may not have anything to do with the differences. How exactly is the light getting to the metering cell? If they do NOT strike the cell at exactly the same angle, and intensity there is almost certainly going to be a difference.

  4. #14
    dmb
    dmb is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Cheshire, UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    35
    The shutter speed shown in the XA viewfinder is not directly linked to the actual shutter speed that is used. It is operated by a separate circuit from that controlling the electromagnetic shutter. My old XA always shows about 2 stops slower speeds than a separate meter would indicate however the actual exposures are fine. It is possible to adjust the viewfinder meter but it is NOT for the faint hearted.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,322
    Quote Originally Posted by dmb View Post
    The shutter speed shown in the XA viewfinder is not directly linked to the actual shutter speed that is used. It is operated by a separate circuit from that controlling the electromagnetic shutter. My old XA always shows about 2 stops slower speeds than a separate meter would indicate however the actual exposures are fine. It is possible to adjust the viewfinder meter but it is NOT for the faint hearted.

    I was beginning to wonder about how the cell was mounted on the XA - it's not TTL metering is it?
    A more meaningful comparison could probably be made between say an original LunaPro (cds cell) and a LunaPro SBC. Calibration, metering angle, etc should all be the same, the only significant difference would be the spectra response of the cells themselves.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    909
    I wouldn't think the Canon is optimized for B&W from my experience (that's all I shoot). I do not like/trust the Canon metering because I had exposures all over the place on every AE-1, A1, AE1P camera I ever owned, and I tested the shutter speeds on all the cameras before shooting them. I finally gave up and bought an FTb and it's been spot on w/ the exposures. I think the Canon system is good for color, but not necessarily B&W film. Of course these are old cameras and who knows how they behaved back when they were new. For what it's worth, every Nikon or Nikkormat I've owned didn't have any exposure issues. I trust the Nikon meters, not so the Canons.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,089
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by David Lyga View Post
    I have a Canon AE-1 and an Olympus XA. Both have working meters. Both deliver identical and accurate readings for daylight situations with, of course, the same film speed. But, oddly, the XA shows two to three stops less exposure needed under incandescent lighting than the Canon requires.

    Now, most of us know that color film requires about two stops less exposure under incandescent lighting (without the blue filter) than the same speed of traditional B&W film does under that same incandescent situation. This leads me to come to a possible (but erroneous?) conclusion that the Canon metering is optimized for traditional B&W negative exposure and that the XA is optimized for color (slide?) film. Comments? The XA metering is from a CDS cell and, I believe that the AE-1's cell is silicon blue photodiode. - David Lyga
    What kind of incandescent light?
    Regular household tungsten light bulbs will be more red than Photofloods. Must film makers that reference a tungsten speed are refering to Photoflood bulbs and not household type bulbs.
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

  8. #18
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran View Post
    yet when the XA meter is wrong it could still deliver correct exposure because (like the OM-2) it has a meter circuit just for displaying and another totally independent circuit to do auto exposure control.
    This is facinating to read. Thank you, Chan Tran. Also, thank you dmb for, essentially the same input. - David Lyga

    mopar-guy: a couple of years ago I hoarded three hundred 100W bulbs and placed them in storage because I was terrified of the flourescent assault. I never regretted that treachery. 100W bulbs did the lighting. Towards the end of the year that they were last going to be legally saleable, they were being almost given away by stores having amazing sales. - David Lyga

    momus: apparently that AE-1 IS optimized for B&W because it reads like B&W film reads light. With color, it would overexpose under the unfiltered tungsten lighting. With the proper blue filter I am not so sure. - David Lyga

    both bernard_L and E. von Hoegh: I will try the added intensities of tungsten light and, to the best of my ability, the different colors. Will report here possibly tomorrow. - David Lyga
    Last edited by David Lyga; 01-15-2014 at 03:48 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #19
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,680
    Quote Originally Posted by snapguy View Post
    Mechanical and electronic gizmos hate us and are out to get us. Their plot is working.
    snapguy, your real name isn't Woody Allen is it ?
    Ben

  10. #20
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,229
    OK, I did the tests. These is a congruity with higher levels of tungsten lighting: both match. The different colors read do not seem to matter, only the light intensities. Apparently that CDS cell on the XA did not respond well to low tungsten (probably low daylight also) levels.

    I don't want to hype this too much as there are profound variances to be found with meters on cameras that are decades old. But it would be interesting for all to compare their various light-meters and see what happens. One does not have to even use up film, as the readings are revealing. - David Lyga

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin