Agnus Published on April 21, 2009
by Agnus

Agnus's blog

Browse posts
New lens arrived
Posted on October 22, 2009
2 comments (latest 4 weeks ago)
Privatsphäre
Posted on October 20, 2009
5 comments (latest 5 weeks ago)
Holiday photos
Posted on September 2nd, 2009
Great site on photographic optics
Posted on May 14, 2009
3 comments (latest 5 months ago)
Exposure issues with manual focus lenses on a digital EOS body
10 comments (latest 4 months ago)
M42 manual focus lenses
Posted on March 28, 2009
8 comments (latest 7 months ago)
Back online
Posted on January 26, 2009
Laptop broken
Posted on January 3rd, 2009
3 comments (latest 10 months ago)
My favourites
Posted on December 21, 2008

Keyword tags

exposure
backlight
manual focus
M42
Canon EOS

More information

This post is public
Attribution + non Commercial + share Alike
  1. 1 person added it to his favorites
  2. Read 396 times

Exposure issues with manual focus lenses on a digital EOS body

Tuesday April 21, 2009 at 07:17PM

I have now had some more opportunities to further test my manual focus lenses with M42 screw mount. Now that my autofocus-confirm adapter has arrived I moved from the focussing issue to the next problem: light metering and erronerous exposure aswell as milky pictures when shooting backlight photos.

The first part seems to be a known issue and apparently relates to an exposure compensation algorithm that EOS-bodies apply to compensate for non-linear light metering. Look here and here for further information. (Hier auf Deutsch.) My AF-confirm adapter emulates the presence of a 50 mm lens at aperture f/2.0. All lenses I tested seem to exposure correct when set to this aperture. The lower the aperture the higher the degree of overexposure (up to + 2 EV @ f/16) and that ssems to be true regardless of which lens I have screwed on. I tested this behaviour on the following lenses (M42-mount) on my EOS 400D:

  • Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35 mm f/2.8
  • Helios-44M-4 58 mm f/2
  • Hanimar 55 mm f/1.4
  • Auto Revuenon 55 mm f/1.4
  • Porst Tele MC auto D 135 mm f/2.8


It seems as if I have to live with the overexposure and as far as I am aware of the issue and shoot in RAW I can deal with it.

But last weekend another issue showed up: when shooting backlight photos all of the above lenses show not only flares (reflections of the aperture ring but the whole picture looks milky, misty, glaring, contrast-poor and whatever else you might want to call it. Further down you will find some samples.

I agree these pictures were shot without lens hood but I never before in my short photo-career have produced such pictures with one of my new Canon-, Sigma- or Tamron lenses and I didn't use lens hoods in the beginning. The horse was even shot with the built-in lens-hood extended!

Has this to do with coating? Has anyone made similar experiences and/or has an explanation for that behaviour?

backlight 3
backlight 3
backlight 2
backlight 2
backlight 1
backlight 1

10 Comments / add your comment?

Johanpro says:
Da habe ich keine Probleme; dieses Bild war z.B. auch mit Gegenlicht aufgenommen:

Watching the deer

Vielleicht ist es ein bisschen experimentieren, und ständig das Histogram benützen?
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink / translate )
Agnus replies:
I do look at the histogram after every shot now but the above pictures are not just overexposed. Glare is the problem. Your picture, which is very good indeed, is not really a backlight pcture, is it? The sunlight seems to come rather from the side... And maybe the SMC of your Pentax lens does a better job in suppressing glare.
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
Agnus edited this comment 7 months ago.
Johanpro replies:
This here was fully backlit:

Skeelering
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
Agnus replies:
So what am I doing wrong then? :(
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
Johanpro replies:
Do you use uncoated lenses? They are much more difficult to control, especially because of internal reflections. This was taken with a Pentax Takumar with SMC coating.
My guess is that your Helios should do well too, if it is a relatively recent model.
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
Agnus replies:
Judged by the coloured reflections of the lenses all are at least single coated but the Porst is the only one that explicitly says "MC". I could not find that it does a better job than the other ones I tested.
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
Johanpro says:
Ok, I did some testing directly against the sun, using a classic lens design (Pentax SMC takumar 200/4 from the 70's) and a modern lens (Canon EF 24-85 from the 90's). Contrast is maybe a bit higher with the modern lens, but really not much. At least I am not getting the issues you have. Are you sure it's not due to over-exposure? Anyway, experimenting is part of the fun, isn't it? :-)

Btw, this was also shot against the sun, without a lens shade (Pentax Super Takumar 35/3.5), and it is completely flare free:
Zonsondergang
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
Agnus replies:
I am rather sure it's not due to overexposure. I have done some further testing an found that shooting directly against the sun (with the sour of light within the field of vision) is not so problematic. But at certain angels of incidence my lenses produce this conrast reducing glare. I can compensate for that effect in Lightroom but still: it is definitely more pronounced than with my new lenses.
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
Johanpro replies:
Yes, I can imagine that the older, single coated, lenses suffer most from that. It is one of the areas where optic technology made progress during the last 20 years.
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )
LucisPictor says:
An interesting issue, although I've only had problems with mis-exposure from f8 on (EOS 350D with cheap Chinese split-screen).
Posted 4 months ago. ( permalink )

Add your comment

Reply to this comment

Edit your comment

Please sign in to post a comment Sign in now?


rss Latest comments – Subscribe to the feed of comments related to this post.

 

Català | Čeština nové | 中文 | Deutsch | English | Español | Esperanto | Ελληνικά | Français | Galego | Italiano | Nederlands | Português | More...