Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

When I think of "Shooting in Manual" I think of picking up my Nikon F, loading a roll of Velvia 100, grabbing my Luna Pro and going out to shoot.

What does "Shooting in Manual" mean in the digital world? Does that mean you turn off all auto functions, grab a light meter and make your expensive digital camera into a Nikon F?

alx Loc: NJ

Think of it as picking up your trusty Nikon F with a Photomic head and using the available information to make the decisions necessary to make the picture you want to make using the basic functions of the camera.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

I don't have a Photomic head, just a prism finder.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

YES, and you make the tradeoff's of shutter speed, F stop and ISO.

BebuLamar

There are many definition of shooting in manual. There are 2 categories focusing and exposure. Let leave out the focusing for now. People define shooting in manual exposure in different ways.
1. The camera must not need battery power to function. There must be no meter built in or hand held.
2. Camera can have electronically controlled shutter but it has to be in manual mode and the meter either built in or hand held is not used.
3. One can use either uses the built in meter or hand held meter but aperture, shutter speed and ISO must be set manually.
4. One must set aperture and shutter speed manually but can let the camera controls the exposure by enabling auto ISO.

So it's up to you which one is considered "shooting in manual"

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

You set shutter, aperture ISO and do NOT use any meter whatsoever.
Once you use a meter you might as well go to P or any other setting on the camera including the vaunted M setting.
Why? If you set your camera per the meter you just did what the camera told you to do and what it would have done anyway.
Auto ISO, Shutter or aperture are in no way manual.
Looking at the meter then under or over exposing is still not manual as you are still a slave to a meter.
Think Matthew Brady in the mid 1860,s and you will know what manual was.

RichardTaylor Loc: Sydney, Australia

For me it means taking control of aperure, shutter speed, and ISO to achieve what you want.
Why use an external light meter, for non flash photography, when you have a camera with a live histogram in the viewfinder? My camera does have a live histogram in the viewfinder.
I still mostly use autofocus.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Manual exposure mode, not manual focus. There's a light meter in the digital camera, it would be silly to use an external meter. Whether you want to use AUTO ISO or dial the ISO in manual is personal preference. If your camera only aligns the ISO to the 0-mark in AUTO ISO, you need to set the ISO manually is you want good / better results. If you want out of focus images, try manual focus using the limited DSLR view finder. Save manual focus for your tripod and Live View and the 10x zoom.

alx Loc: NJ

Well, shooting in manual with a digital camera starts you off with the advantage of the F Photomic. You DO have the option of basing exposure on your external light meter if you desire. Either way, it is up to YOU to decide each element of the exposure.

You can really go manual, forget your LunaPro, and take your old printed exposure guide from that roll of Velvia and learn to eyeball everything.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Doing most settings yourself - some use in camera meter, others a separate meter but not often. I change f-stop and SS and leave ISO on Auto with limits set in menus.
Sometimes I will do manual focus but usually use AF (some lenses let you fine tune the focus).

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

It means you put the camera in manual and set everything to what the camera says to do.
You know, manually as opposed to having the camera do it automatically.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Nine replies in 20 minutes and I already feel like a better photographer for the knowledge imparted herein 🤭 🤗

User ID

.

Would tend to say yes although it’s okay to ditch the Luna Pro for an onboard meter. And that is my usual SOP ... not for “practice”, simply as my comfort zone. It’s a matter of “old dog, old tricks”.

But no way would I reacquire any classic film cameras. They can’t do 60fps. Had one that did 10fps but it needed reloading after 4 seconds. Also the MF Assist magnifier in digital cameras is the best focusing aid I’ve EVER used. And no more expense and toxic caustic trash from Polaroid test shots.

I’m pretty much doing what I’ve always done from way back when, and the new cameras are better at the old methods than the old cameras ever were. I still have the old lenses though, and they are my mainstay for the digital bodies that match their format.

One more aspect of many digital cameras is also helpful for old school methods ... I refer to the APSC and m4/3 cameras. The Boakeh Kult decries the tremendous DoF that small formats force upon them. Wellllll ..... Boakeh Kultists can just go suck an egg. Old school practice VALUES deep DoF ... usually could never get enough of it. So that’s one more way new cameras are better than oldies at enabling old school practices.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Cabin Fever just told me I missed one of the main definitions of "Shooting in Manual".

I go over to my friend Manual's place and shoot pictures in his computer shop. Lots of things for still life subjects.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

This morning, I went out to try to photograph the flyover of the Blue Angels as they recognized and honored healthcare workers and local hospitals. My home is located between two legs of the approximate route that was published. I knew that the effort was going to be difficult, because I'm not really that close to either of the legs, and they were planning to fly low and fast, meaning that I might not even be able to see them, and if I did get lucky, my window of response was going to be very short..on the order of a few seconds, and likely with very little warning.

All that said, I decided that my best probability for success lay with a preplanned manual exposure and the expectation of doing some post processing later. So I went out in the front yard with my D850 and 200-500 lens and got set up for the shot as follows:
ISO -- 1000
EC -- +3 stops
Aperture -- f8
Shutter speed -- manually set to balance the exposure
Manual focus at infinity

A test shot of the sky provided OK results, but the sky, while not completely washed out, lacked saturation. So...I changed Exposure Compensation to +2 stops, adjusted shutter speed, and tried again, with acceptable results.

So now the waiting began. The formation appeared without warning, about a mile to the north, flying from east to west. I managed to get my camera up and aligned (not a trivial accomplishment at 500mm) and fired off two quick exposures.

My result, which I will not be posting here, was two beautifully exposed, and slightly (but obviously) out of focus images. Somewhere in the excitement I lost track of the fact that the 200-500 is a consumer grade lens and unlike all of my other lenses, the focus ring is closest to the camera body. At some point, I bumped it slightly and upset my carefully adjusted focus.

In my mind, if a photographer claims to be shooting manually, that is pretty much what the process looks like. Using the camera's meter is fine. It's like any other meter. But nowhere along the way are any of the camera's capabilities to rescue from error used. With today's cameras, I consider all three sides of he exposure triangle to be (mostly) equivalent. If you allow the camera to adjust any of them, you are not shooting manually. If the camera is set up in a way that it can rescue you from error, you are not shooting manually. Just so you know...when I am next in a situation to capture an image like this, I'll probably follow the same procedure. But...(and especially if I use that lens) you can guarantee that I'll have autofocus turned on.