Photography Phrustration

Shaun @ Tru6 · 07:27 AM

Have a new Sony NEX-5N. Testing in my office in auto mode, pictures come out oddly dark. Way too dark. In manual mode, I have to set the ISO to 1600 to take "normal" pics of desk, walls, chair in the office. After reading a ton of reviews on several cameras, thought this camera would be perfect out of the box for our photo shoot tomorrow and product shots.

Any thoughts on what's going on with it? Something I should be checking? I've taken 100+ pics with different settings and if I want to learn manual photography, it would be great, but don't have the time or smarts for that. And I don't want to fool around with electronic aids like exposure compensation every time there's a new light environment.

One interesting point is when I point the camera down to the floor, it takes excellent pics with the right brightness. Aimed up at a wall, doorway, whatever...dark.

cantdrv55 · 09-22-2012, 08:06 AM

I can't help you with your photography question. I just wanted to welcome you back. Hope you are feeling good. Stay well, Shaun.

Eric Coffey · 02:11 PM

Check the metering mode.

Not sure on that camera's settings/features, but it might be set to "spot" or something strange (far corner of the frame? etc.) and metering the light/exposure for a very tiny portion of the frame. Try setting it to whatever the camera's option is for "matrix" or multi-metering and see if that makes any difference. Also, check the focus settings if applicable. Some of the newer cameras have different focus-area settings that can mess with exposure.

See if you have an ISO limit setting as well. It could be that in some situations a ISO higher than 1600 is needed, but a limit is set in the camera at or below the necessary level. When in lower light situations, try shooting in aperture-priority mode, with the lens wide open (and no limits on the ISO).

Or for indoor/low light situations, it could simply be a function of pushing the limits of the camera's sensor with a slow lens.

masraum · 09-22-2012, 04:23 PM

Post a pic or two that you've taken

flatbutt · 09-22-2012, 05:06 PM

any pix of nurses?

Steve Carlton · 09-22-2012, 06:00 PM

How about wet T-shirts?

Shaun @ Tru6 · 09-22-2012, 07:16 PM

Back in from a very long day seeing my grandfather, and of course I forgot the battery charging here, so no new pics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cantdrv55

I can't help you with your photography question. I just wanted to welcome you back. Hope you are feeling good. Stay well, Shaun.

Thanks! I'm about 3-5 days from being truly caught up in life and back. Today was a good day for the hip. Yesterday, first day I used both legs walking upstairs. Making progress.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Coffey

Check the metering mode.

Not sure on that camera's settings/features, but it might be set to "spot" or something strange (far corner of the frame? etc.) and metering the light/exposure for a very tiny portion of the frame. Try setting it to whatever the camera's option is for "matrix" or multi-metering and see if that makes any difference. Also, check the focus settings if applicable. Some of the newer cameras have different focus-area settings that can mess with exposure.

See if you have an ISO limit setting as well. It could be that in some situations a ISO higher than 1600 is needed, but a limit is set in the camera at or below the necessary level. When in lower light situations, try shooting in aperture-priority mode, with the lens wide open (and no limits on the ISO).

Or for indoor/low light situations, it could simply be a function of pushing the limits of the camera's sensor with a slow lens.

Thanks Eric, good points, it has 3 different modes for metering. I'll play with those. 1 is spot, 1 is multi, and there's one more. Will also check on the ISO limit and focus too; just seems like out of the box it should take pics "correctly."

Quote:

Originally Posted by masraum

Post a pic or two that you've taken

Will do tomorrow, want to take some outside pics; everything I've done so far was trashed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flatbutt

any pix of nurses?

this ok? would like to do Vargas girl car shirts someday.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

How about wet T-shirts?

someday too.

Joeaksa · 09-22-2012, 10:12 PM

Same as what Eric said. Play with the various modes and guessing that you will find one that works fine.

masraum · 09-22-2012, 10:13 PM

I was thinking that if we could see the bad pics, they might provide a clue as to what the problem was, especially if they include the exif data.

LWJ · 09-22-2012, 10:28 PM

Can you put the settings back to "default?" I do Canon and I think I have the option for this.

Either it is whacked, or a setting is off. I like the spot meter in an upper corner idea. Clever.

A new camera you may not figure this out. A return to default could be the ticket. I was also wondering if there is a possibility of light leak from the viewfinder? VERY unlikely. But then again you have some strange results.

Best!
Larry

Shaun @ Tru6 · 09-23-2012, 07:09 AM

Just took some new pics and I'll almost certainly be returning the camera. Word of caution, everyone's monitor is set differently, so what I see may not be exactly what you see. Today, beautiful, bright morning, pale blue sky, not a cloud in it.

First pic, on Auto...camera does all the work, can't change anything, Eric, metering mode is on multi. In this picture, the sky is way too dark as is the shaded side of the tower which is a lot lighter in "real life"

Zoomed to tower, again, way too dark

Now on manual, 100 ISO. Here, the tower lighting is exactly as you see it. The lit face is too light. The sky is correct, maybe a little saturated, but that's fine.

Testing 200 ISO just to see if it's working, it is.

here's something odd, all set on Auto, this bush, the grass and the pavement are all correct, pretty much exactly as you see them.

My last camera a Panasonic Lumix LX3 never took pics like the Auto's above. Was a great camera but it's not made anymore unfortunately and I couldn't find a used one fast enough, so researched and went with the Sony. Here's the real kicker. It's the second Sony. The first one I got last week took the exact same dark pics so I exchanged it for this one. Just not meant to be I guess.

maxnine11 · maxnine11's Garage

I think the camera did a good job metering in auto. The highlights are not blown out (overexposed), or too dark (underexposed) The exposure of the shadows then becomes a function of the camera's dynamic range. And P&S cameras do not have the same dynamic range of the human eye. (we can pull details from shadows that the camera can't)

maxnine11 · maxnine11's Garage

This is probably closer to what you actually saw.
( a couple clicks with photoshop. shadow/highlight adjustment)

excuse the low resolution

Red88Carrera · 09-23-2012, 08:05 AM

The picture of the church seems to be taken with the sunlight coming from the side. The others, that you say turned out correctly, appear that the sunlight is coming more from the rear. Try using your hand to shield the lens from the sunlight(as a test) and see if the pics come out any differently.

wdfifteen · wdfifteen's Garage

Glad to see you back Shaun!!

That tower photo is a tough metering problem for any camera. The differences in light between the sky, the sunny side of the tower, and the shaded side of the tower are extreme. There is a lot of sky, so the matrix meter is giving it a lot of weight in its exposure calculation.
I wouldn't be messing with the ISO beyond finding the lowest number that will let me take a photo. High ISO numbers introduce all kinds of noise into the photo. ISO relates to the sensitivity of the light sensor, you need to be experimenting with the amount of light getting to the sensor. In manual mode, I would experiment with aperture and speed settings until I got the best compromise, starting with a small aperture and long time exposure.

island911 · 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxnine11

I think the camera did a good job metering in auto. The highlights are not blown out (overexposed), or too dark (underexposed) The exposure of the shadows then becomes a function of the camera's dynamic range....

+1

I'll question the dynamic range of Shaun's screen used for viewing.

IOW, . if you think that your screen couldn't be failing you, then you are NOT paying attention.

...why do people so rarely question their screens for the dynamic clipping? :-/ meh

You're welcome, Shaun.

Shaun @ Tru6 · 09-23-2012, 09:54 AM

it takes good food shots. Heading out soon for the photo shoot, we'll see how it goes.

Shaun @ Tru6 · 03:59 PM

A ton of pics to go through, did much of the day in ISO 100.

Here's a shot on Auto.

now on ISO100

Our office manager's Fuji Finepix on auto. her colors are washed out and clearly not as crisp. On screen, enlarged, the Sony pics look world's better.

Shaun @ Tru6 · 09-23-2012, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxnine11

I think the camera did a good job metering in auto. The highlights are not blown out (overexposed), or too dark (underexposed) The exposure of the shadows then becomes a function of the camera's dynamic range. And P&S cameras do not have the same dynamic range of the human eye. (we can pull details from shadows that the camera can't)

Thanks Max. Maybe my expectations are too high based on the reviews I read. I don't know. I can use Levels in PhotoShop and get a nearly perfect rendering of the image I took compared to what I saw, but I just can't do that for the thousands of pics I take a year, most for business, many for fun. I would have to get another LX3 and do a similar shot to see what happens in this light with those shadows. I've looked at old pics and I like them a lot more than the ones with the Sony. What I like about the Sony is the depth of color, but that's expected with the much higher resolution.

After I go through the shoot pics today I can make a better decision I guess.

Shaun @ Tru6 · 09-23-2012, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

Glad to see you back Shaun!!

That tower photo is a tough metering problem for any camera. The differences in light between the sky, the sunny side of the tower, and the shaded side of the tower are extreme. There is a lot of sky, so the matrix meter is giving it a lot of weight in its exposure calculation.
I wouldn't be messing with the ISO beyond finding the lowest number that will let me take a photo. High ISO numbers introduce all kinds of noise into the photo. ISO relates to the sensitivity of the light sensor, you need to be experimenting with the amount of light getting to the sensor. In manual mode, I would experiment with aperture and speed settings until I got the best compromise, starting with a small aperture and long time exposure.

It's good to be back, thank you! though I've got a few more days of getting stuff back in order before things are normal again, if they ever were.

I guess it comes down to this. My LX3 was out of the box a great camera. Thought this one would be too, actually much better. Unfortunately, I'm not the kind of person to learn aperture and speed...it seems like baking. I don't bake well.

I'm going to post my experience on a Sony NEX forum and see what they say. Maybe it's supposed to take pics like these. My experience with other decent cameras says probably not though. We'll see.