I thought I'd just reinforce this; learning this has helped me massively understand how to expose properly, and if you don't have time/are in a rush - always, always, expose for the sky.
Newbie question - Exsessive blowouts
- Thread starter Jaysmark
- Start date
I thought I'd just reinforce this; learning this has helped me massively understand how to expose properly, and if you don't have time/are in a rush - always, always, expose for the sky.
I think what the OP is saying is that the D750 is over exposing compared with his D7000 despite performing a hard reset on the D750. With the side-by-side comparisons it is obvious something is going on. From what I've read, there are some settings that don't get reset during a hard reset so what settings might account for the difference? Yesterday I asked him to check the +/- button to see if it is set at '0'. What other settings might be causing this?
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
I know with my camera(s), from reading the books that I bought (don't have any handy right now), I learned there are several ways to perform a hard reset. I would suggest the OP read the manual a little further and see if they can reset a different way.
Yes but one can't compare two shots when both cams are set on A and using auto-ISO. Both don't necessarily use the same settings. The range of auto-ISO on both is hugely different, their native ISO probably too.
I just did with my D3300 vs D750. Both 24mm same aperture and "all go" on ISO and shutter. Then I put them down and pointed at the same object.
They used the same ISO which is to be expected since they're both of the same generation but the shutter was 1/30s vs 1/40s. I expect the difference between the D750 and the D7000 to be much bigger when you set half of the settings on auto.
Last edited:
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Looking at the shots in Post 13 it seems to me they are pretty well exposed, depending on what you're wanting to expose FOR. Lets look at the woman holding the drawing; her face looks perfectly exposed to me. Yes, the pad she's holding is blown out, but if we were to expose for the drawing pad instead, her face would be under-exposed.
The shots of the building look well exposed to me as well, depending again on what you're trying to expose FOR. If you don't want to blow out the illuminated front door, you would have to expose for that and that's going to darken the sky, just as we're seeing in the shots.
I don't think there is an exposure issue here... I suppose there *could* be a dynamic range issue but I'm doubtful of that. These are high dynamic-range shots we're looking at and as J-See's processing shows, the exposure can be easily managed/balanced in post'.
....
The shots of the building look well exposed to me as well, depending again on what you're trying to expose FOR. If you don't want to blow out the illuminated front door, you would have to expose for that and that's going to darken the sky, just as we're seeing in the shots.
I don't think there is an exposure issue here... I suppose there *could* be a dynamic range issue but I'm doubtful of that. These are high dynamic-range shots we're looking at and as J-See's processing shows, the exposure can be easily managed/balanced in post'.
....
There is little washed out in that night shot of the building. He just needs to set exposure right and compensate for these shots.
I lowered the exposure by 5 stops in post to show the detail in the blown out parts.
All the info is there, he just needs to get it out. The histogram didn't show any relevant highlight clipping.
Here you go; five minutes of work and using a small sized JPEG.
I lowered the exposure by 5 stops in post to show the detail in the blown out parts.
All the info is there, he just needs to get it out. The histogram didn't show any relevant highlight clipping.
Here you go; five minutes of work and using a small sized JPEG.
Last edited:
The two cameras may very well both be set on auto ISO in Aperture Priority, but *if* they are both metering correctly and *if* there aren't any other setting differences, their metering should be quite similar. Generally meters are designed to meter as 18% grey so regardless of the ISO, they should be close in exposure unless there is a setting difference somewhere or if the metering is off.
I'm not familiar with the D7000 so I wouldn't know how it meters but my D3300 overexposes most of the time by 1/3th of a stop even when manually set identical as the D750. Normally such is not possible so either some models have "tolerance" in their settings or different sensors capture light more or less intense. His shots are perfectly normal in my opinion. I checked his histogram and nothing got clipped that will always be clipped in these shots. That they differ from the D7000 is perfectly possible. Two different meters, two different sensors and two different ways of processing that.
Mine is exactly identical when I take night shots. The only difference is that I compensate to get the exposure I want.
These are the histograms of both shots:
The problem is not that the D750 overexposes. It's quite the opposite, the D7000 underexposed. It could use at least one stop more. The D750 correctly distributed the middle tones and took a nicely balanced shot with minimal clipping.
I just checked in LR and have to add one stop and almost 1/3th to get the same exposure so whatever the settings, the D7000 used one stop less light. That's another setting for ISO or shutter.
Look at the shots when I add that stop difference:
The problem is not that the D750 overexposes. It's quite the opposite, the D7000 underexposed. It could use at least one stop more. The D750 correctly distributed the middle tones and took a nicely balanced shot with minimal clipping.
I just checked in LR and have to add one stop and almost 1/3th to get the same exposure so whatever the settings, the D7000 used one stop less light. That's another setting for ISO or shutter.
Look at the shots when I add that stop difference:
Last edited: