Olympus E-500 "P" mode problem encountered

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by Rich, Oct 16, 2005.

  1. Rich

    Rich Guest

    I went to a local camera store to check out this
    new DSLR. The program mode default seemed to have
    a problem as it radically over-exposed the image.
    The clerk couldn't figure out the problem, I fooled
    around with the camera but couldn't figure out why
    it was doing this either. We even swapped lenses on it,
    no luck. However, a manually-set exposure seemed fine.
    See the bottom two images in this gallery:

    Rich, Oct 16, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Rich

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    Positive exposure compensation?
    JPS, Oct 16, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Rich

    Rich Guest

    Five stops worth? Pretty wide.
    Rich, Oct 16, 2005
  4. Rich

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    How do you know it is 5? I would have guessed a bit less.

    What is "multi-spot" metering mode? The center seems to be a black
    JPS, Oct 17, 2005
  5. Rich

    Stacey Guest

    Spot metering off a black "spot" is more likely his problem.
    Stacey, Oct 17, 2005
  6. Rich

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    According to EXIF, spot metering was enabled, so the picture looks exactly
    as I would expect it to.

    Why would you use program mode, anyway?

    Are you ever actually going to buy a camera?
    Jeremy Nixon, Oct 17, 2005
  7. Rich

    RichA Guest

    I shot six shots, all pointed at different subjects, they all ended up
    massive overexposure. So spot metering "may" have been the cause,
    but the overexposure was on everything, not just highlights.
    But I will try one again with matrix type metering.
    I'm not that familiar with the new Olympus control system, and neither
    was the clerk.
    Program mode is ok for some shots, why not? I use spot metering and
    full manual most of the time.
    As for buying a camera, I'm waiting for the E-3.
    Oddly enough, I compared the E-1 to the E-500 and although
    the E-1 is magnesium and sealed, it's body weighs about the
    same as the plastic-bodied E-500.
    RichA, Oct 17, 2005
  8. Rich

    RichA Guest

    The overexposed shots varied from 1/3 sec to 1/10. The actual scene
    exposure was 1/60th.
    RichA, Oct 17, 2005
  9. Rich

    eawckyegcy Guest

    On the one hand, we have a large camera company that wouldn't be large
    if they didn't know what they were doing, and whose product in question
    has likely seen more testing than a few snaps in a store.

    On the other hand, we have a user that hasn't demonstrated a clear
    connection to physical reality alot of the time.

    The Bayesian Prior is almost insurmountable here: user error.
    Well, that's the nature of overexposure for you.
    Then why are you bothering with all this program mode stuff then? Are
    you pointlessly nitpicking an excuse to defer purchase yet again?
    Looks like it.
    If you can't afford the equipment, just admit it. At the very least to

    If you can, get off the pot, right now, and just march back down to
    Henry's and buy something. Expensive. Whatever it will be, you'll
    enjoy it a hell of a lot more than hours of endless hand-wringing and
    eawckyegcy, Oct 17, 2005
  10. Rich

    Rich Guest

    My tax bracket is now 37%. Even in Canada, that's high.
    Nothing wrong with waiting while the rest of you live with the bugs.
    Lets say Olympus blows it, and release an really flawed E-3. That
    will mean I'd have to buy into Canon or Nikon and if that's the case,
    I'd rather do it after they realize they can't rely on ancient slr
    lenses to satisfy everyone except those who like sharp pictures.
    Rich, Oct 17, 2005
  11. Rich

    Lourens Smak Guest

    According to Olympus, the E-1 is 225 grams heavier. (about 1.5x E-500...)

    Lourens Smak, Oct 17, 2005
  12. Rich

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Spot metering *was* the cause. Try pointing it at one of the ceiling
    lights, and you'll get underexposure. If you spent half as much time
    doing photography as you do shopping for a camera you're never going
    to buy, it would be plainly obvious exactly what happened just from
    looking at the example shot for one second.
    Yes, that is what will happen when you overexpose.
    Jeremy Nixon, Oct 17, 2005
  13. Rich

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    You're spending an enormous, almost unimaginable amount of time and
    energy looking at one camera after another worrying about what to buy,
    while the "rest of us" are actually taking pictures.
    Don't judge Nikon based on Canon's lenses. Nikon's ancient SLR lenses
    work quite well on their digital SLRs. No issue at all.
    Jeremy Nixon, Oct 17, 2005
  14. Rich

    Brian Baird Guest

    If you own one of the pro bodies and don't have some of the more
    esoteric lenses.
    Brian Baird, Oct 18, 2005
  15. Rich

    Skip M Guest

    Yeah, gotta be careful with that spot meter! I'm trying to get used to the
    one on the 5D, it's larger than the one I used on my 1n, so it covers more
    variations in exposure. Not sure it's as useful as I hoped, but maybe I
    just need to get more practice with it.
    With a spot meter, you can get some weird results, if you mistakenly think
    that you're metering off of a clear patch of skin, and pick up a shadow,
    instead, or vice versa.
    Skip M, Oct 18, 2005
  16. Rich

    eawckyegcy Guest

    Olympus accepts "tax bracket"'s as payment? Cool!
    Utterly bizarre logic. But not unexpected from you.
    Let me predict now that the "flaw" will be that it'll be "too
    Well, most everyone else knows the lenses can be removed, switched,
    etc, so piffle like this is a complete non-issue. Your neurotic
    fixations on perfection aren't even funny, and sound idiotic when
    combined with babble that is at odds with trivial observation. There
    is even a famous story about this:


    Written by a guy named Andersen, of all people. No doubt unrelated.

    Another relevant page:

    eawckyegcy, Oct 18, 2005
  17. Rich

    JPS Guest

    In message <[email protected]>,
    They're also pretty useless if you don't get the EC correct for it; the
    chances of finding something exactly where you want the exposure's
    medium grey are not always good, and of course, that's not how I would
    expose, anyway. I'd want to spotmeter the highights and put them at +3
    JPS, Oct 18, 2005
  18. Rich

    RichA Guest

    Lets say Olympus blows it, and release an really flawed E-3.

    Let me predict now that the "flaw" will be that it'll be "too

    I doubt that. The E-1, for it's time and what it offered was a
    relative bargain,
    compared to the prices charged by Canon and Nikon for body sealing,
    professional build quality. I doubt the E-3 is going to be too much
    than the E-1 was when it was released.
    But if it bothers you that much that I haven't yet bought a DSLR, maybe
    a stop-gap would be to buy might be the E-300 since it has the best
    features/price of any entry level DSLR out there, compared to Canon and
    Nikon? Problem is, except for the superior noise performance,
    I've compared my C8080 to a DSLR, I just haven't seen enough image
    quality improvement to justify buying into the DSLR cult yet.
    RichA, Oct 18, 2005
  19. Rich

    Skip M Guest

    Yup, but I usually keep them at +1, +3, with film, anyway, left the shadows
    too dense.
    Skip M, Oct 18, 2005
  20. Rich

    Stacey Guest

    I wish they had the multispot cumulative metering with the
    "shadow/highlight" button like my OM4 had. That was the best in camera
    metering system I've ever used. Coupled with the real time OTF flash
    metering, I don't think I ever missed an exposure with that camera.
    Stacey, Oct 19, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.