• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

100-400 -- Overexposing ? (1 Viewer)

Tectortony

Tectortony

Well-known member
I have read with great interest the debate about the 100-400 zoom lens, and because of the good comments I have taken the plunge and got one.
Today is its first trial, it was quite dull this morning and I took some bird pictures at the garden feeders, when I view them in EOS viewer they were all overexposed, I find that I have to adjust the exposure down by one stop for them to be correct. My other lenses do not cause this problem, I use a 70-300 DO lens and a Sigma 170-500 lens, ANY ADVICE PLEASE ?
Quality wise, they are no better than the 70-300 DO lens !!!
 
Tectortony,

I think you need to get an initial light reading at the feeders before you start shooting the birds with a mid-tone object like a grey woollen ball. It could be anything really as long as it has a neutral cast.
 
Tectortony said:
I have read with great interest the debate about the 100-400 zoom lens, and because of the good comments I have taken the plunge and got one.
Today is its first trial, it was quite dull this morning and I took some bird pictures at the garden feeders, when I view them in EOS viewer they were all overexposed, I find that I have to adjust the exposure down by one stop for them to be correct. My other lenses do not cause this problem, I use a 70-300 DO lens and a Sigma 170-500 lens, ANY ADVICE PLEASE ?
Quality wise, they are no better than the 70-300 DO lens !!!
Click to expand...

...you should have bought the 400 prime...everyone knows its better than the zoom...(steps back having lit the fuse) ;)

Seriously though, can you post a couple of shots here with techs (i.e. shutter speed, aperture, ISO, metering mode) so we can see what the problem might be.
 
"...you should have bought the 400 prime...everyone knows its better than the zoom...(steps back having lit the fuse) ;)"

Mark, Mark, Mark you sure know how to turn things on their head!B :)
 
Tectortony said:
I have read with great interest the debate about the 100-400 zoom lens, and because of the good comments I have taken the plunge and got one.
Today is its first trial, it was quite dull this morning and I took some bird pictures at the garden feeders, when I view them in EOS viewer they were all overexposed, I find that I have to adjust the exposure down by one stop for them to be correct. My other lenses do not cause this problem, I use a 70-300 DO lens and a Sigma 170-500 lens, ANY ADVICE PLEASE ?
Quality wise, they are no better than the 70-300 DO lens !!!
Click to expand...

sorry, did no one mention you have to remember to dial down a stop everytime you use it ? :)

seriously, never had any, more or less, issues with this lens than any other.

Quality wise I wouldn't have thought it would be too different from the 70-300 DO which I understand to be a decent lens. However you can shoot sharp pics at 400mm handholding at 1/125 which the DO struggles with ;-)

I hope you find out what the problem is.
Richard
 
I wonder if it was just the dull conditions. I've not had any problems like this with mine - other than images looking dull and muddy on dull days. In decent light theres no problems at all.
 
The lens doesn't really have anything to do with exposure measurement. Metering is done by the camera. Maybe you had some exposure compensation dialed in by accident.
 
Tannin said:
The lens doesn't really have anything to do with exposure measurement. Metering is done by the camera. Maybe you had some exposure compensation dialed in by accident.
Click to expand...

Metering is done pre-exposure at full aperture. It could be that the lens isn't stopping down to the taking aperture properly.

Does the effect vary with the set aperture?
Find out by comparing a series of test shots (eg 1/2000f5.6, 1/1000f8, 1/500f11 etc)
 
andrew_s said:
Metering is done pre-exposure at full aperture. It could be that the lens isn't stopping down to the taking aperture properly.

Does the effect vary with the set aperture?
Find out by comparing a series of test shots (eg 1/2000f5.6, 1/1000f8, 1/500f11 etc)
Click to expand...

This is true. The only case where the lens will contribute to overexposure is when the aperture diaphragm on the lens is not working correctly. The suggested test above will quickly detect if this is the problem.
 
Thanks to all of you that replied to my query, I agree with Macshark about a diaphram not working correctly. I tried exposing fully open on "AV" setting then stopping down, each exposure gave the same results so it is not a fault of the diapham.
I believe I have found the answer, the 70-300 DO lens which I have used for some time is very good but it is a little short on contrast.
The 100-400 has much more contrast, therefore the highlights are higher and the shadows are deeper, hense the burnt out highlights, if I compare the mid tones of both lenses they appear about the same.
So I believe the problem is solved ! Just got to get used to it !!!
Once again thanks all, one day I might get pictures as good as Keiths.
Tony
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

C
I've got a Canon R7 and need to update my lenses
Replies
15
Views
1K
Barred Wobbler
Barred Wobbler
Oregon John
R7 and RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 IS USM performance in low light?
Replies
5
Views
6K
pdwinter
pdwinter
Steve Babbs
Zuiko 100 - 400 vs 300
Replies
9
Views
705
Steve Babbs
Steve Babbs
ermine
Canon EF USM L 100-400 Mk1 repair -
Replies
0
Views
788
ermine
ermine
BenjiS
Budget Canon lens
Replies
8
Views
1K
nikitasius
N

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top