Why do I keep getting tricked by my telephoto lenses?

MEC407 wrote:When you're using the wide angle lens, you're capturing more area (and more light). When you're using the telephoto lens, you're capturing less area (and less light). That's why you get different meter readings with different lenses.

What I originally meant to say is that wide lenses let in more sky, while long lenses let in less sky. However, I was trying to be as clear and un-confusing as possible, and apparently did just the opposite. LOL

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is this:

Let's say you're standing 50 feet away from the locomotive. If you take a picture of the locomotive with the 28mm lens, the locomotive is going to take up only a small part of the frame. Much of the frame will be dominated by sky, and sky = more light, which means you'll need either a faster shutter speed or a smaller aperture (higher f number). If you take a picture of the locomotive with the telephoto lens, the locomotive is going to fill up much more of the frame, and the sky will fill much less of the frame, and since less sky = less light, you'll need either a slower shutter speed or a larger aperture (smaller f number).

Hopefully this makes sense and I'm not just confusing everybody further!

(Note: none of the above applies if your camera has a spot meter and you're using it. The K1000 does not have a spot meter, so in Otto's case, the above info is applicable.)

As far as film is concerned: it is a known fact that Ektachrome E200 has the widest latitude of any color slide film currently on the market. Much wider than 1/3 stop, that's for sure. Kodachrome 64, on the other hand, has extremely narrow latitude, thanks in part to its high contrast (which many mistake for high saturation). You can underexpose or overexpose E200 by up to 1 stop and still get a usable image; try that with Kodachrome and you won't be so lucky.

Films with moderate contrast such as E100G, E100GX, and Astia 100F, don't have quite as much latitude as E200, but they still have more latitude than Kodachrome 64, Provia 100F, or the Velvia family.

If you want the best possible latitude and want to be able to underexpose or overexpose by a stop or two and not have to worry about the consequences, your best bet is a low-to-moderate-contrast color print film, such as Kodak Portra 160NC or Fuji Pro 160S (formerly Fuji NPS 160).

Sorry if my opinion stepped on anyones' toes. It WAS a known and accepted fact that the stuff had a 1/3 stop range, but that info is about 20-30 years old and may no longer be correct. It was known as an excellent film for accurate color reproduction with the cavet that it had limited dynamic range. Most of my info comes from b.s. with the company photog while he was doing work on one of my hardware projects. He used it, and advised me not to for the above reasons.. I prefer(ed) saturated (strong) colors instead.. I haven't used the stuff in at least that long, and that was the reason, and of coarse no longer have any use for film and no reason to update my knowledge..anyway.. SRI again..

However, more area does not mean more light... a wide angle lens of the same f stop has a SMALLER diameter, and admits the same amount of light, assuming that the wider angle does not include previously excluded brighter areas.. Understanding that is kinda important... Ed

EdM wrote:It WAS a known and accepted fact that the stuff had a 1/3 stop range, but that info is about 20-30 years old and may no longer be correct.

None of the Ektachrome emulsions that were in production 20 to 30 years ago are still sold today. Your opinions and information are obsolete and irrelevant to the films that are produced today.

David, I used to shoot Ektachrome 200 myself and, after trying several other films, eventually settled on Fujichrome Provia 100F. I would recommend giving it a try; I prefer its color rendition to that of any of the Ektachrome films. You can buy it online from B&H, Adorama or any of the other big retailers and it will probaby cost less than the consumer film at the drugstore.

[None of the Ektachrome emulsions that were in production 20 to 30 years ago are still sold today. Your opinions and information are obsolete and irrelevant to the films that are produced today.



OK.sri agn.


" settled on Fujichrome Provia" ...... me too,, if my memory is correct, sumpin I am beginning to doubt...

BTW, Kodak stopped production of their Caroscell Projectors a few years ag0, and last week the (about to retire) guy in the local photo store told me that Kodak is no longer making BW paper.... Guess film is next, and the Lone Ranger is going to go backrupt.

The last film order I sent to Adorama took 2 months, suggest you try B&H...


Ed

EdM wrote:BTW, Kodak stopped production of their Caroscell Projectors a few years ag0, and last week the (about to retire) guy in the local photo store told me that Kodak is no longer making BW paper.... Guess film is next, and the Lone Ranger is going to go backrupt.

It's actually the professional Ektagraphic line of slide projectors that is discontinued ... several Carousel models are still available from the big retailers (they may just be remaining stock-on-hand, though). Your local photo guy is correct that Kodak is discontinuing its line of black-and-white paper as well. It certainly does appear that Kodak is looking to get out of the "wet" photography business. Fortunately for film shooters, Fuji remains committed to development and production of high-quality color films and papers, and a number of fine black-and-white products are still available from Ilford and other manufacturers.

The last film order I sent to Adorama took 2 months, suggest you try B&H... Ed

I'll second that. For a while I switched to Adorama after an experience with a very rude representative from B&H, but Adorama does tend to be quite slow in shipping orders, quite a contrast to B&H's usual next-day shipping.

very rude representative from B&H,

Yeh, I did run into some of that in the B&H store, but I just chalked it up to typical NY City manners..

Guess I'm just a Midwestern bumpkin who expects people to be friendly and cooperative when representing their company, regardless of what city they're in. ...

yeh, well, if you spoke in HIS native language instead of english, he woulda treated you a lot better, meybe.... very few people who live "out on the island" shop in the "city", in fact, I don't think I have been "on the ground" in the city since,.... passing thru doesn't count... and I stopped film for digital in 1997 so if hadda been before then... "Focus" in Bkln is pretty good also..going into that store can be an educational experience.. different world, but friendlier...

Hi All,

This discussion has really wandered all over the place. Okay some facts are needed here.

A light meter give you an opinion, nothing else. It is up to you to decide whether to accept that suggestion. With a through the lens meter, irrespective of the focal length of the lens I am using at the moment, if I have some doubt, questions, an uneasy feeling, I will move the camera around, left to right, up and down, and see what that does to the reading. Now I can take the average, and decide what I want to expose for, what I would like to see in the picture.

And yes, I would get a hand held light meter. It is another opinion and gives suggestions as well. Again, move it around see where the bright spots are and where the dark spots are. Then make up your mind and go for it. Good luck and I will also give you the advice of the professional photographer that taught me what he knew, you fill your mouth with marbles, and each time you take a shot, you spit out a marble. When you have lost all your marbles, you are a photographer.