CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Look at the NEF files as the EXIF will complete there. I believe the Nikon software will provide a complete listing of EXIF data from Nikon cameras. The same 'full EXIF' will be in the JPEGs as well, but only the files as SOOC - straight from the camera. I've done an analysis in the past showing that Adobe strips EXIF data. The AUTO value appears in the shooting mode as in:

Quality : RAW
Raw Image Center : 3018 2010
Red Balance : 2.351563
Reference Black White : 0 255 0 255 0 255
Resolution Unit : inches
Retouch History : None
Retouch Info Version : 0200
Retouch NEF Processing : Off
Rows Per Strip : 4022
Samples Per Pixel : 1
Saturation : Normal
Scale Factor To 35 mm Equivalent: 1.5
Scene Capture Type : Standard
Scene Type : Directly photographed
Sensing Method : One-chip color area
Sensitivity Type : Recommended Exposure Index
Serial Number : 2543119
Sharpness : Hard
Shooting Mode : Continuous, Auto ISO
Shot Info Version : 0227
Shutter Count : 6366
Shutter Speed : 1/3200
Software : Ver.1.03

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

If you upload the other file, you'll see the auto-ISO label, as Chg_Canon did. By only viewing the one, you would have no way to know. Brain cramp on my part in attempting to direct you without explaining that I had both open, side by side, comparing the two

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Yes, I used the NEF and uploaded to the site I linked just before you wrote this comment. My reference to "still stuck on ISO" is because the data appears to suggest that the OP changed his camera setting, perhaps inadvertently.

BebuLamar

I open the underexposed file in View NX2 and I found it's on fixed ISO 160, aperture f/6.3, 1/4000 sec in shutter priority mode. Spot metering and the focus point is center so it pointing at the arm and the blue shirt.
So I don't think the spot metering would cause underexposure but since the camera is in shutter priority and the aperture is at max aperture and fixed ISO the camera simply went ahead and underexposed the shot.
In the brightest condition which is sunny 16 the shot is still underexposed by 2 and 1/3 stops.
I increased the exposure by 2.3 stop in PS and it looks fine.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I'm with the suggestion to use matrix (full frame) metering. I think that's the Nikon term. You mention shooting both RAW + JPEG. Personally, I shoot only RAW, use Canon's Evaluative metering (the same full-frame) and I expose for the highlights.

If we consider the player having just hit the ball and your shutter-priority with AUTO-ISO, I would set my shutter speed and test one or few exposures looking at the highlight warnings and where they are blinking, if at all. I would not want the player's pants to 'blink' as this could lose the details of the player's uniform, even in the RAW. However, if the top of the fence behind the player was blinking, I would allow this natural looking highlight.

Exposure compensation is your friend here, forcing the camera via the aperture and / or the ISO to brighten or darken the image against your fixed shutterspeed. The ISO-3200 JPEG looks good, although maybe this is after your processing? We have folds in the white pants and details in the dark uniform. It looks like the only detail "lost" is the reflected sun off the top of the fence. Turn the EC dial to negative, if desired, to obtain an exposure where these highlights are not overexposed.

Vietnam Vet

Have you considered exposing for the face and shooting in manual? It avoids all the problems of the camera choosing a setting for you. 2000 shutter, 1200 or less ISO. 2.8 for shallowest depth of field.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

So since the ISO issue is still questionable, let me focus on the shutter speed and metering. First, although I usually shoot other sports, I don’t think you need 1/4000 or 1/3200 shutter speed. I will let those more experienced with baseball correct me, but I would think 1/1000 would be adequate to freeze the batter’s action (if not the baseball itself). Secondly, since you want to focus on the batter and not the other “clutter” around him, I would pick an aperture with a DOF at the subject distance of maybe 3-4’ so you get both the batter and swinging bat in focus - a DOF calculator such as DOFMaster accesable from your phone would be useful here. Then I would let the ISO float on auto ISO. Finally, I would choose matrix metering or the equivalent since you have a variety of brightness in the shot. If you spot meter on the pants, the background will be dark, and if you spot meter on the jersey, the pants will be blown out. Just my thoughts - more experienced baseball shooters may disagree.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The lens used doesn't include an f/2.8 option.
Lens : 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 G VR

BebuLamar

Both shots were in Spot metering and it wasn't the reason for bad exposure. The second shot was with manual ISO and fixed shutter speed of 1/4000. The camera can control the aperture but only to f/6.3 it can't open up the aperture any more.
So if the OP used Matrix metering the second shot would still be underexposed. If I were the OP I would certainly use a slower shutter speed like 1/1000 or 1/500.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Good set of observations here and above. Given the limits of the lens for maximum aperture across the zoom range, there's the aspect of 'something has got to give'. The 'action freezing' shutterspeeds of 1/2000 and higher involves either more direct light or a wider aperture from a different lens. Or, a noise-creating high ISO. For freezing the batted (or pitched) ball, 1/1000 should work in this mixed light situation.

bleirer

So the good news is that there is nothing wrong with the camera! You might try to figure out how it got knocked out of auto ISO, did you bump a dial, most likely scenario? Does the camera have some exposure safety feature that allows it to override your settings. Wild guess there, my camera has exposure safety shift that can override ISO if it thinks you are getting a bad exposure. Can be turned off.

As an aside, I am always surprised how bright sky is, even cloudy sky. So the scene is backlit in a sense, i know the sun is straight overhead, but with that piece of bright sky on the top left but the dugout for the rest. The meter might try to darken the rest. Combined with the exposure safety override and the meter trying to darken the scene, it must have called the ISO 160 exposure correct for where the meter was pointing. Evaluative metering is not as easily fooled as our eyes.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Your camera is fine. Cameras don't ever get fooled, but the photographer often is - at least in the beginning.

Since the lighting isn't really changing, you may want to try setting an ISO that works for your chosen shutter speed and aperture. You should try spot metering on the white pants, and adding 1-1/3 to 1-2/3 stops to the reading. Then use manual mode for exposure, so things don't change on you. Basing your exposure on the white pants will ensure that the pants will not be blown out, but in this case there is a good chance the image will appear underexposed.

Shooting raw+jpeg does nothing for you, and it could potentially result in good jpeg midtones at the expense of highlights, which seems to be what happened in your first image. You can't really use that jpeg out of the camera, but the second shot, which appears a little underexposed is PERFECT for adjustment in post processing - and you didn't blow the highlights.

Shooting jpeg and raw at the same time is reminiscent of a line from a Little Feat song - Rocket in my Pocket - "she's got one foot on the platform, the other foot on the train" or this visual -

(Download)

Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA

Thanks to all of you who read my post and replied with comments. I normally shoot @ 1/1250 or so outdoors, just wanted to see what might happen at a faster shutter speed. Taking photos in RAW and JPEG gives me a chance to get good captures without having to make adjustments via post processing. My thoughts were that being a very bright sunny day (sans clouds) that an ISO of 200 or less should have been acceptable. I can't imagine why auto-ISO had to put the camera into 2000+ on such a bright day. I need to let you all know that the majority of the photos I took yesterday DID have good exposure. Maybe I did accidentally turn off the auto-ISO and not realize it. Old age doesn't come alone..............and I still have a lot to learn. Thanks to all of you, God bless.

bleirer

Just keep having fun! You would have been close with the 1/1250. If you were 2 stops underexposed in that shot, you could have kept the 160 but brightened it by any 2 stop combination of shutter speed and/or aperture. For example keep the ISO 160 but double the time of 1/4000 to 1/2000 to be 1 stop brighter, double again to 1/1000 to be another stop brighter.

the f/stops here Loc: New Mexico

It seems to me that by being in shutter priority, your leaving the camera two variables to control. Why not use manual exposure control with you setting both the shutter speed and the aperture and giving the camera the ISO to control. I think by doing this you’ll find more consistent results.