exposure and 7D/5D

F Bulgarelli · October 8, 2011

Hello

I'm sure this topic has probably been discussed before, I was curious as to the different methods people have to figure out the exposure on the 7D or 5D

I've been relying on the histogram, although, not very accurate, also, use the internal camera spot meter on a 18% chart as well as taking a still and analizing the data

I'm wondering about any other methods people might have to come up with a good and consistent exposure

Thanks

Vincent Sweeney · October 9, 2011

This is yet another reason why the AF100 and F3 sell so well.

Ari Davidson · October 9, 2011

This is yet another reason why the AF100 and F3 sell so well.

That and all the other video specific features that come with a video camera.

In my experience the camera ISO ratings are fairly spot on at a standard setting. It tends to get a bit mirky once you use other picture profiles (i.e. Technicolor Cinestyle). My suggestion would be to install Magic Lantern which will add false color and a waveform, or attach a third party monitor that provides the same. Marshall has a lot of bang for the buck, but TV Logic is my favorite.

F Bulgarelli · October 9, 2011

Thanks for you input

So many people shoot with these cameras, I'm surprised there isn't more input

Keep it coming

Thanks!

Phil Rhodes · October 9, 2011

Well, I didn't really feel qualified to advise...

I use the histogram, sometimes taking stills for later reference as to what the histogram for that setup looked like. I would always rather a waveform because that's my technical background but not to the extent that it's worth carrying one. It has never occurred to me to use a light meter, I'd rather use the array of 2 million light meters in the camera...

It can be quite surprising to find out in the edit what a waveform display of the image looks like, compared to the histogram.

Needless to say, heavy underexposure is the name of the game in any case.

F Bulgarelli · October 10, 2011

Well, I didn't really feel qualified to advise...

I use the histogram, sometimes taking stills for later reference as to what the histogram for that setup looked like. I would always rather a waveform because that's my technical background but not to the extent that it's worth carrying one. It has never occurred to me to use a light meter, I'd rather use the array of 2 million light meters in the camera...

It can be quite surprising to find out in the edit what a waveform display of the image looks like, compared to the histogram.

Needless to say, heavy underexposure is the name of the game in any case.

Hi Phil

Are you saying that the crappy histogram on the 7D does not relate in any way to a real waveform or the images are actually underexposed.

thanks

Martin Hong · October 15, 2011

use a light meter would help a lot

otherwise it all depends on the situations. What you are trying to capture, because the exposure meter on the camera is just suggestion, so to speak. 2 days ago i was taking a picture of a black bag, the exposure meter on the camera would tell you that the subject is too dark, but its a black bag, is supposed to be dark, you can change setting to see how it works. I dont know why you mean that histogram isnt reliable, it suppose to tell you the luminance value of the overall picture.. of course it won't be accurate, but is the best thing you have when you dont have a light meter...