How is it possible? At 1/1000, my picture turns out UNDERexposed but I've seen many action photographs coming out well (ie. Sports photography) even at that speed.
What must I look out for?
What must I look out for?
Originally posted by Necroist
How is it possible? At 1/1000, my picture turns out UNDERexposed but I've seen many action photographs coming out well (ie. Sports photography) even at that speed.
What must I look out for?
Originally posted by erwinx
I don't understand why your photos are underexposed. Reasonably fool-proof metering systems were perfected more than 10 years ago, and unless you have an extreme lighting situation (eg shooting at the sun), theres no reason why you should get underexposure.
Even consumer digicams like the coolpix 995 which I've used on a few occasional give very good exposures. So 2 questions:
(1) What camera are you using?
(2) When you say you use 1/1000 shutter speed, I assume that this is based on the camera's meter reading ? (not a case of shooting in really dim light, totally ignoring the fact that camera says 1/10 and shooting at 1/1000 and wondering 'why my shots underexposed?)
Originally posted by StreetShooter
First things first, did anyone set the exposure compensation in the camera at -1 or -2?
Originally posted by Flare
or did you just set to 1/1000 but the camera's largest aperture still cannot get enough light?
Originally posted by Necroist
I did choose the largest aperture when I set the shutter to 1/1000.
Originally posted by Jed
Okay, without meaning to sound stupid, you do know what a "large" aperture is, and haven't got it the other way around right? Even in reasonable daylight, with ISO 100 sensitivity, you should still be getting enough light. If you're sure you're doing everything right, wait till a sunny day, or crank the sensitivity up to about ISO 400.
Originally posted by Necroist
I'm not too sure about that...