Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,821   Posts: 1,581,755   Online: 1096
      
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ash, Kent
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    133
    Images
    25

    Mamiya RZ/Portra 400 flash exposure Vs Nikon D200

    Hi all, I have been delving into flash portraits with my RZ67 and Portra 400. As a check, I set my Nikon D200 (Dont worry APUGer's -its a camera from the future ) with ISO at 400 to match the portra and both at f22. The D200 shutter speed was at 1/250 and the RZ at 1/400.

    I expected the exposures on the RZ to mirror the ones from the D200. When I developed the images from the RZ, they were all around 1.5 to 2 stops overexposed!

    Is it that the film is just more sensitive to the flash type of light?? Confused!

    Paul
    Speed Graphic, Fuji GX680,Pentax 67, Mamiya RZ67, Mamiya 645 1000s, Nikon F5, Nikon Fm2

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    area 76
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by 10speeduk View Post
    Hi all, I have been delving into flash portraits with my RZ67 and Portra 400. As a check, I set my Nikon D200 (Dont worry APUGer's -its a camera from the future ) with ISO at 400 to match the portra and both at f22. The D200 shutter speed was at 1/250 and the RZ at 1/400.

    I expected the exposures on the RZ to mirror the ones from the D200. When I developed the images from the RZ, they were all around 1.5 to 2 stops overexposed!

    Is it that the film is just more sensitive to the flash type of light?? Confused!

    Paul
    Paul, I think you'll find the D200 is a camera from the past. Well, a number of things could be going on to introduce the perceived discrepancy between film and digital. Were both cameras functioning correctly? Sticky aperture blades are easily seen, but a 'slow' leaf shutter in an ageing RZ would only be confirmed with proper test gear. Did you develop correctly? You'd only know if you processed a control strip etc. Fortunately, colour neg is very tolerant of overexposure.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Greenville SC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    272
    I'm no expert, but I remember reading how even when set at the same speed, a digital sensor isn't necessarily the same sensitivity as film of the same speed. If you are going to use a digital SLR as a meter for film, I would suggest doing tests to see ths ISO it needs to be set to get the exposure you expect on film.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ash, Kent
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    133
    Images
    25
    Thanks Neil and Ian C, I guess it could be a quirk with my gear. Either the RZ, D200 or a mixture. I will perform the same test but this time deliberately under-expose the RZ film by 1 stop and see if that sees things heading in the right direction. My D200 is tempermental as is the RZ, so who knows. Cheers Paul
    Speed Graphic, Fuji GX680,Pentax 67, Mamiya RZ67, Mamiya 645 1000s, Nikon F5, Nikon Fm2

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by edcculus View Post
    I'm no expert, but I remember reading how even when set at the same speed, a digital sensor isn't necessarily the same sensitivity as film of the same speed. If you are going to use a digital SLR as a meter for film, I would suggest doing tests to see ths ISO it needs to be set to get the exposure you expect on film.
    I have heard the exact same thing. I have never tested it though.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    155
    Images
    8
    Funny, my experience is the opposite; the DSLR sensors being more sensitive than the ISO number indicates. If I metered a studio flash setup with a handheld flash exposure meter, my 35mm slides were properly exposed while the DSLRs (Canon & Nikon, various models) were showing overexposure by 1/2 to 1 stop.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ash, Kent
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    133
    Images
    25
    Thanks guys, at least I know I am not mental and this sort of thing does happen for the same setups! Luckily, lightroom saved my ass, as I managed to drop the exposure without ruining the images, hence my guess at around 1.5 stops over exposure.
    Speed Graphic, Fuji GX680,Pentax 67, Mamiya RZ67, Mamiya 645 1000s, Nikon F5, Nikon Fm2

  8. #8
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,333
    Images
    12
    When you say the Portra was "overexposed", on what basis are you making this judgement? Scans? My guess is that you're scanning and your inversion process is wrong, e.g. incorrect selection of white-point.

    I ask because you can overexpose Portra by 3 stops and have it print nearly identically to a normal exposure. Being C41, it's extremely overexposure-tolerant and therefore I doubt that you could even tell that a properly-printed image was 1.5 stops overexposed by looking at it. You could probably tell with a side-by-side A/B comparison but the differences will be subtle, e.g. increased shadow detail and slightly reduced highlight contrast.

    If you want to check your DSLR-preview/metering skills, expose some chromes. They too should come out right if you do it carefully.

    A DSLR is a perfectly valid means of checking an exposure but you need to make sure that it is setup correctly, i.e. make sure the dynamic-range optimisations are all disabled. The ISO film speed standard is a standard (from ISO, who'd have guessed?), and the digital world follows it just as rigorously as film manufacturers.

  9. #9
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,955
    Images
    226

    Mamiya RZ/Portra 400 flash exposure Vs Nikon D200

    My answer, get a light meter!


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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