Manual Shooting: I got my first 35mm camera in 1960 and every shot was manually exposed, except for the ASA (now ISO). After a while, I bought and used a light meter and my pictures...

Jim1938

I got my first 35mm camera in 1960 and every shot was manually exposed, except for the ASA (now ISO). After a while, I bought and used a light meter and my pictures became a lot better and much more interesting.

Lately I've seen quite a few questions regarding manual shooting and wonder why one would ever want to shoot entirely in manual mode, except in some very rare circumstances? At best, manual mode is a guess about the proper exposure settings, although some photographers can probably do a passable job. Certainly, I can see setting two variables manually and letting the camera set the remaining variable automatically, but totally manual exposure, I don't see.

What am I missing? Does "manual" mean setting two variables manually or does it mean setting all variables manually? Are manually exposed shots better in some way? Is it just a guessing game and the one who gets the closest to a great exposure wins the game? Help...

BebuLamar

While I did and still do using manual mode without using the meter at times but when people talk about manual they meant to use either the built in or hand held meter. If you use the spot meter to measure light on a particular area or areas of the picture you do not set the exposure to what the meter said.
A simple example if you use the spot meter to measure the brightest area of the scene you would have to increase that exposure by some amount, 1.5 or 2 stops or so and not using the exact same reading.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Manual means whatever someone wants to misunderstand it to be ... Is it putting the DSLR to M and using the meter to set the exposure to the 0-mark? Is it setting the camera lens to manual and using the Live View on the DSLR or the focus "peek" to 100% in the MILC EVF? Is it setting the ISO to a specific value instead of AUTO ISO? Is it using EC to push the exposure until the histogram is just touching the right side? Is it taking the JPEG SOOC with no PP?

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

You are not missing anything.

My first camera was a Nikon with a meter in about 1971. Like everyone else, we learned to use manual. Now that I have cameras with brains, I use the most automatic settings a lot. No, not exclusively. I am happy with knowing when the auto mode won't work.

art pear Loc: North Dakota

I shoot in manual 95% of the time. It gives me the look I want and it is not hard to figure out what settings to use to get the look you want. Sometimes I miss a photo because the subject or clouds move and the lighting changes, but that is part of the game.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

In these days of Digital cameras, the process of getting the best exposure, is just too easy to accomplish. Some people however try to over complicate things, and get themselves and others, into a tangled mess. 'KISS' WORKS!

srt101fan

Jim1938 wrote:

I got my first 35mm camera in 1960 and every shot ... (show quote)

Hopefully the more knowledgeable and experienced UHH members will give you specific examples when full Manual is called for.

My only advice is to take any advice starting with "Manual gives you more control" with a grain of salt. Many here talk too much about "losing control" to the camera and not enough about the benefits of the various shooting modes.....

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

I do a significant amount of portrait work so use manual for those photos as it provides consistent exposure for each one.

For other subject matter I may use a different setting, aperture, shutter or ISO then chimp and adjust something to get what I want.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Jim1938 wrote:

I got my first 35mm camera in 1960 and every shot ... (show quote)

Manual is not a guess if you know how to use your light meter. Intelligent use of the light meter, either in the camera or a hand held meter, to know where to take readings, use spot metering when called for, etc. can result in more accurate exposure, especially in difficult lighting situations where the auto camera functions can be fooled.

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

The settings in a camera is always a guess, just depends what you want the final exposure to look like. Some photographers want to blur the background or keep it in focus or keep moving subjects from blurring in a certain photo, manual just gives the photographer control of all the settings. Manual is easier for me because I can follow the exposure graph.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The aperture and shutterspeed are the exact same whether you set those values in manual or whether the camera set the exact same values in AUTO. The camera might have set them faster while you fiddled with the camera and missed the moment.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

CHG_CANON wrote:

The aperture and shutterspeed are the exact same whether you set those values in manual or whether the camera set the exact same values in AUTO. The camera might have set them faster while you fiddled with the camera and missed the moment.

Exactly. Missed the moment or maybe even the exposure!

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

srt101fan wrote:

Hopefully the more knowledgeable and experienced UHH members will give you specific examples when full Manual is called for.

My only advice is to take any advice starting with "Manual gives you more control" with a grain of salt. Many here talk too much about "losing control" to the camera and not enough about the benefits of the various shooting modes.....

"UHH members will give you specific examples when full Manual is called for."

I was on a woods walk and spotted an owl sleeping in a hollowed out part of a tree. It was in a shadow. "Auto" was exposing perfectly, but not on the owl. I switched to "P" and twisted the compensation dial until it looked good in the EVF. Now it got the owl exposed right. Being mirroless helped because I didn't have to shoot and peek. I could keep the camera at my eye and twist the dial.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I'm of the opinion that the results of most photographer's will improve more from learning how / when / why to move their focus points around than how to expose in manual.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Jim1938 wrote:

I got my first 35mm camera in 1960 and every shot ... (show quote)

I had my first experience with a 35mm camera, using my father's Minolta SRT-101. It was prior to 1975. I used mostly Kodak Kodacolor 200 ASA film. Sometimes B&W film. It only had a 50mm lens on it. I remember the light meter days. But haven't seen a photographer lately use one. I was curious to see what they cost now. They range from $300-$1600 from B&H. Sekonic was the name Brand that I saw. You brought back an old memory. I have used the Sunny 16 Rule, a long time ago, on manual lenses that would not meter on the camera. Or, you could use the guessing method, that was not always the best guess? Those were the manual only days. You do have choices on the dial mode, on a digital camera, to fit your needs. You don't have to shoot 100% manual today. Is it always the best method? To some it is. Not me.