Z250SA wrote:
For fast or dark action there is no doubt that the present tech is preferable (huge understatement!)
But sometimes I really miss the slowness, the tranquility of photography with real cameras, my Linhof, with lenses with real names like Superangulon. This includes also the waiting for the result. For you youngsters, no the Linhof had no review button. Silly yes, but so it was and we all accepted it without wining on the internet forums as those were as abundant as the review buttons.
Large format was near useless for my living subjects - the kind that fly or run rapidly and can kill you. Eyeballs and subject AF and high ISO and AI NR have made so much possible. In the 20th century much was impossible or very hit and miss.
I certainly have used all manual and no metering cameras (no larger than 6x9) in the olden days, but I don't recall tranquility since the limited DOF and changing light often meant no slacking on the mission. I used to carry a Minoltas Autometer with the spot lens on it as well as a laser rangefinder later on to get better distances. The Plaubel Makita took a verison of the SA 47mm, but it weighed a ton and would get out of whack.
ronno wrote:
For the record - I've shot in studios for years - plenty of shooting in M on a tripod / strobes etc > Food and products for Williams-Sonoma, Google, Sephora, Martha Stewart etc etc.
However, there are times when Aperture Priority rules for me: People on location, on bicycles, in water, portraits in varying lighting etc. Situations where the less time you spend looking at your camera instead of what's happening in front of you, the better.
Cheers.
It seems from reading your observations that this is just how it is on the R5II. It is choosing faster SS than 1/focal length and if you use the bias to slower SS then it is going too slow (slower than 1/focal length).
You seem to want it to stick to 1/focal length. Fair enough.
I think you should just shoot the camera in M+AutoISO. Set the SS to 1/focal length and then you just vary your aperture like you are doing anyways in Av mode. Sounds like you are mostly shooting primes so you'd only need to change SS when you change your lens. Put on your 85mm...take half a second and dial in 1/85s...for the rest of the shoot you just adjust your aperture as in Av mode. Put on your 50mm, take half a second to dial in 1/50s and move on with the shoot.
Who knows why Canon changed that logic in Av mode but it seems like it can't be dialled in to 1/focal length so M+AutoISO is your simple solution with basically zero extra effort to have it run the same as an Av mode with 1/focal length logic would run.
Totally agree with Geoff, time to rip the bandaid and just start down the M + Auto ISO path. It provides you better control and more predictable results.
1/FL is such an arbitrary rule to bind yourself to, unless you're printing 8x10's of static subjects from film shot behind a non-stabilized lens. M+auto ISO lets me quickly choose the settings I want for the scene at hand.
Mike_5D wrote:
1/FL is such an arbitrary rule to bind yourself to, unless you're printing 8x10's of static subjects from film shot behind a non-stabilized lens. M+auto ISO lets me quickly choose the settings I want for the scene at hand.
If you regularly shoot with a variety of lenses, you'll also note that 1/FL isn't a universal rule by any means. Some lenses I actually need to shoot FASTER than 1/FL and some I can get away with 2/FL. It's not a bad baseline by any means, though.
RoamingScott wrote:
If you regularly shoot with a variety of lenses, you'll also note that 1/FL isn't a universal rule by any means. Some lenses I actually need to shoot FASTER than 1/FL and some I can get away with 2/FL. It's not a bad baseline by any means, though.
Even with the same lens, the scene usually dictates the shutter speed for me since 1/fl only addresses camera shake. 1/fl is a quick way to keep a noob from shooting a 200mm lens at 1/30 and wondering why everything is blurry.
FYI: just sold the Canon.
My Sony A1 is far more consistent and predictable as to metering; and the video files (log) have so much more dynamic range that it is my choice for the work I do.
