FE 24-105mm f/4 Exposure Inconsistency

[Pat Morrow]

I took my new FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS for a test run, and in the course of using it on two different bodies (in this case, the A6500), noticed that there is a sporadic drop in exposure value by about 1/3 stop every 8 or 9 frames.

 

A couple days later I shot another series with the A7RIII body, and came up with the same result. It occurs whether on single shot mode or multi shot mode, and in all cases, I haven’t changed any of the exposure settings from one frame to the next.

 

Any thoughts on why this is happening and what can be done to correct it?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[keepcoding]

disable electronic first curtain shutter in bright daylight

 

I hate that Sony doesn't have an option in the menu that will make the camera switch automatically to EFC for shutter speeds < 1/500s or so (just like on Olympus cameras).

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Well, unless you were using Manual exposure it's very easy to explain. When you have snow in parts of the frame, any movement of the camera or in the scene will result in a slightly different exposure reading. Reflected light metering is volatile in snowy scenes.

 

In multi metering the camera will interpret the scene and make exposure adjustments accordingly. That may also differ between frames.

 

There are two ways around it. Either take an exposure reading off a grey card and use Manual exposure (do WB while you're at it). Or use an incidental light meter (hand-held) and use Manual exposure.

[keepcoding]

Jaf could be right, maybe it's just wrong metering / AWB.

I was just a bit irritated by the sky at the top of the frame being much darker than the rest of the sky.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

There's a third way if you have no accessories. Use center-weighed metering and place in center on the horison and lock exposure. Not as good as the others but it works. A fourth way would be the sunny 16 rule. But, really, having a grey card is tops in these situations.

[Pat Morrow]

thanks for your input, but i've shot thousands of photos in this type of environment with a variety of lenses and camera bodies, and this is the first lens that is giving me exposure grief. here's a sequence shot yesterday with my 6500 and 16-70 with uniform exposure results - there were more in the sequence, and all were within a tight tolerance of exposure despite the fact that the camera and subject changed position a significant amount.    

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[tinplater]

The latest set seem to be shot in a more overcast, uniform lit scene.  I would think the bright snow/sky combo might be more likely to result in a variation of the exposure where the dynamic range is so much greater.  I personally wouldn't fret over one out of a dozen sequence exposures being slightly off.  Do you feel your camera is not metering correctly when you shoot just a single image?

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

You can't really compare those sets. In the first one you have strong direct sunlight creating reflections. That will affect the reflective metering a lot. In the second one you have a flat, overcast light which is more consistent over the frame.

 

Of course, if you believe the lens is faulty, you can send it in. I doubt they'll find anything.

 

This phenomenon is not new to me. Exposure does vary when you rely on auto functions. On some camera and lens combos I have the variation may be as much as 2/3 of a stop. That's why I use manual exposure when consistent exposure across several frames is important. Maybe you're just noticing it more now because you feel critical of the new lens?

[Username]

There is nothing between the two sunny snow scene shots 

that would cause an AE mode to alter settings.The frames 

are composed absolutely identically. Return the lens ASAP  

especially if you were NOT using any auto modes for WB 

or exposure ... which I presume you are experienced enuf 

to have avoided.  

   

In your shoes I'd NOT exchange it for another. If I really 

needed a 24-105, and experienced your results, I'd avoid 

any further risk of being an Early Adopter. I'd just return it, 

and then wait at least a few months before trying again. 

  

FWIW, most of the "diagnoses" in this thread ignore the 

obvious or else go off on an irrelevant tangent, while some 

of the "technical advice" recommends obsolete methods 

from the chemical photography era. But then mebbe you'd 

already noticed that .....  

[Username]

disable electronic first curtain shutter in bright daylight

 

I hate that Sony doesn't have an option in the menu that will

make the camera switch automatically to EFC for shutter

speeds < 1/500s or so (just like on Olympus cameras).

     

Whatz your point in contradicting yourself ? This shot

is 1/160 @ f:9. Did you check the exif or did you not ?   

Most likely not.  

[Username]

........... A fourth way would be the sunny 16 rule........

   

FWIW, ISO 100, 1/160", f:9.0 DOES follow 

the "Sunny 16" principle, so there's no user 

fault here exposure-wise. 

[Username]

...... Do you feel your camera is not metering correctly

when you shoot just a single image?   

 

Quite clearly stated is that he does NOT doubt 

the accuracy of the cameras ... please note that 

"camera" is singular. The gear in use here is

"cameras". That final "s" indicates the plural. 

This then impugns the lens itself. 

 

 

Even if there actually were such a creature as 

"correct exposure" ... which is more of a unicorn 

than a mule ... just how would you advise stating 

that a SINGLE frame were "correctly" exposed ?   

   

Point is, BOTH of the sunny scenes are equally 

well exposed. The issue is that they SHOULD 

be identical but they are NOT ... and thaz bad :-(

[Username]

.............

I was just a bit irritated by the sky at the top of the

frame being much darker than the rest of the sky.

    

The sky can't help it. Can't really judge the 

altitude, but it appears to be waaaay above

sea level ;-)

[Username]

............. 

Of course, if you believe the lens is faulty, you

can send it in. I doubt they'll find anything.

.............

   

Sad but true about Sony service. Hopefully, 

since he was checking out his New Lens, 

the return-for-refund period has not expired. 

  

Not find anything ? Sad LOL. It could come

back in worse shape :-(

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Calm down, user. My methods are not obsolete. They're aimed at removing the algorithms that work silently in the background to give different exposures. If people knew the basics, we wouldn't have threads like this.

 

I'm surprised you didn't tell the OP to stomp on his lens or pour hot coffee on it. Not feeling like stirring things up today?

[Username]

Calm down, user. My methods are not obsolete. They're aimed at removing

the algorithms that work silently in the background to give different exposures.

If people knew the basics, we wouldn't have threads like this.

 

I'm surprised you didn't tell the OP to stomp on his lens or pour hot coffee on it.

Not feeling like stirring things up today?

   

Actually, incident meters and gray cards are obsolete. Acoarst a card 

just causes a reflection meter to substitute for an incident meter, and 

acoarst I gotta agree that if users knew the basics we wouldn't have 

threads like these.  

  

The incident meter and gray card are not obsolete in the sense of no 

longer working. They DO work. But we now have reflected meters of 

such high sophistication that they even show us a rendition of the 

image, and show us the tonal distribution if we know how to read it,

and they record the image as well. So the old tools DO work, just as 

a Model-T Ford will carry people from place to place. The Model-T 

works, but it's obsolete. 

  

The point is, the function of a meter, used properly, evolved to help  

predict what would become of our latent image on film that we were 

unable to confirm [except by use of a Polaroid back] at-the-scene. It 

reported to us via numbers, which we learned to understand. Modern 

meters report to us by actual image and by histogram. That is what I 

mean by calling the earlier, numeric-read-out meters obsolete. If you 

prefer to call them "eclipsed" I spoze that would be more proper, but 

"obsolete" is close enuf for rock-n-roll. 

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Nope, the reflective light meters are still flawed. They are good enough to make users rely on them. But they are not good enough to produce reliable results in all situations. People over-rely on them and other auto functions to such an extent that they become unable to work the camera to a desired result.

 

A grey card is the smallest thing that will enhance your photography the most. It not only produces a similar result as an incident light meter, it helps you set the correct white balance. And let's face it, Sony has always struggled with AWB. Every camera model has a slightly different colour cast.

 

The over-reliance on auto functions results in unimaginative photography marred by blandness and sameness. There's something inherently tragic about a cadre of unskilled users using the same expensive gear on auto functions.

[Steve C]

I see this (snow scene) as an ideal scenario for an incident light meter. It never failed me when using  slide film and it won't fail now.

It's also less costly than throwin' hot cawfee al o'er the lens and saying "thazzdunnitgood",  bro.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Shooting film is different because of the latitude and less reflectibility of the image surface.

[Username]

`       

   

  

Just how do I get my incident meter and/or

my gray card to show me preview images

and/or histograms ?   

   

Please explain the magic procedure in very

plain language, cuz I have tried, over and 

over, to accomplish this, but the old tools 

refuse to cooperate, and having used them 

for 50 years, they are now gathering dust 

and headed for the dumpster :-( 

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Just how do I get my incident meter and/or

my gray card to show me preview images

and/or histograms ?

 

Please explain the magic procedure in very

plain language, cuz I have tried, over and

over, to accomplish this, but the old tools

refuse to cooperate, and having used them

for 50 years, they are now gathering dust

and headed for the dumpster :-(

 

Then perhaps you weren't using them right to start with.

 

Using a grey card or incident light meter has the great advantage of setting the correct exposure for the amount of light that lights a scene. That means you can lock exposure and don't have to change it unless the light changes. If you take a series of photographs, each feature will have the same exposure across the frames (although the histogram may vary).

 

A reflective light meter reacts to the amount of light that hits the sensor rather than hits the scene. So your exposure will change everytime you move the camera, or if the algorithms feel like changing exposure. So if you take a series of photos, they'll all have different exposure. In one photo an object will be bright, in another it will be dark - although it was lit the same. The reflective meter will push or pull exposure of the same object, depending on what else is in the frame.

 

If you use AWB the colours will also shift if you move your camera. That's because the light hitting the sensor will have a slightly different colour composition, depending on what's in the frame. If you use a greay card, the WB is set after the colour of the light that hits the scene. If you take a series of shots everything will have the same colours regardless of where you point the camera.

 

For example if you're photographing a red village in the alps. With camera auto functions, the buildings will shift from purple to orange and the sky from magenta to turquise. In some photos they'll be dark, in some they'll be bright. But if you start by setting exposure and WB on a grey card, everything will have the same colour, the correct colour, and the same brighness regardless of how you point the camera.

 

If you are photographing people, it's even more important to lock exposure and WB to correct values. Otherwise, people's skin will change over a series of photos. In one photo they'll look tan in another they'll be pale. They might shift from red to green, looking drunk or ill.

 

I hope you do know that serious photographers are still using grey cards, incident light meters and colour charts with digital cameras?

 

Does all this ring a bell or do I have to explain it further?

[Username]

Then perhaps you weren't using them right to start with.

 

.........................................................

 

I hope you do know that serious photographers are still

using grey cards, incident light meters and colour charts

with digital cameras?

 

Does all this ring a bell or do I have to explain it further?

     

       

"serious photographers are still using grey cards"  

   

Serious ? I don't doubt they are serious. Clueless ?

Also no doubt about that either. Serious but comical. 

A fine bit of irony, worthy of the The Bard his selves ! 

 

   

 

Did you actually read the question to which you've so

extensively responded ? 1st sentence especially, as

repeated here for your conveneience:

 

"how do I get my incident meter and/or my gray card 

to show me preview images and/or histograms ?"    

   

You've utterly failed to answer that ... you never even 

addressed it. OTOH, acoarst there IS NO answer, as 

you should now see, IF you've re-read the question ;-)  

  

Sooooo ..... clearly no need to "explain it further", and 

yes acoarst it "rings a bell", at least for me, given that   

I "wrote the book" on that stuff ... and, therefor, I know  

when it began, and when it ended. It's ended, Its time

is past.  

  

Now, if you please, actually consider the question:  

   

"how do I get my incident meter and/or my gray card 

to show me preview images and/or histograms ?"       

    

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question    

  

   

    

  

--------------------------------------------------------------     

    

        

  

 

Just for kicks, here's a question that actually has an 

answer .... a supremely short, simple answer:   

  

"What can a gray card or incident meter inform you

about the scene before you ?"

      

HINT: Two-word answer, first word is "absolutely".

 

   

    

   

 

`

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Give it up. You have exposed yourself.

 

One thing that comes to mind is that photo of a lady with auburn complexion that you posted a while back. Pretty lady but not a flattering portrait. Her face was tinted green by fluorescent lighting and you had done nothing to prevent or fix it.

[Username]

Give it up. You have exposed yourself.

 

One thing that comes to mind is that photo of a lady with auburn

complexion that you posted a while back. Pretty lady but not a

flattering portrait. Her face was tinted green by fluorescent lighting

and you had done nothing to prevent or fix it.

      

    

This the only time I can recall photographing any lady in 

such awful lighting, and she is quite pink, not green .....

   

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

       

      

  

I checked the archives ! And I really DID photo a lady 

in a shop lit by commercial fluorescents ! And here is

the link [see post #5 of that thread]:   

  

http://www.sonyalphaforum.com/topic/7754-maiko-portrait-rant-included/  

     

  

You see this pale redheaded lady as green ?    

   

ROTFLMFAO ! Go tune up your color monkey.  

    

AAMOF, only the background is fluorescent lit, She's lit

by daylight from a storefront window behind the camera

position [note the lack of overhead lighting shadows]. It 

was shot in July in a summer resort town and I must say

she's done a 100% job of shielding herself from the sun ! 

 

   

   

`

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

The auburn lady in the link is green. Moreover the photo is a bit flat and washed out so you did something funny to it.

 

I don't understand why you post such awful photos to prove your points. If you're going to fight everyone, you shouldn't expose your own weakness.