New user, I've left Nikon after 15 years!

[AntonLargiader]

I think my response stems from a nuance that's lost in the terminology gap created by auto-ISO. We have a name for auto exposure control by shutter (Av), by aperture (Tv), but not by gain. For that, we say "manual with auto-ISO" and when the auto-something gets left off it sounds like plain old manual. And after all, the dial is set to M.

So when Nige says, "My main problem is with shooting manual. I used to shoot manual with the D500 happily enough, but with the Canon the exposure compensation takes on a life of its own...and have missed some owl shots when the exposure has decided to amp up to make the camera unusable" it's not really manual because he is allowing some level of auto-exposure. And even then, I don't think the EC would be what the camera is changing automatically. Again, my understanding of EC is that it's basically a static bias that you apply to the camera's metering, and it only would do anything if the camera is already performing some sort of auto-exposure function. If A, S, and ISO are locked down using the three dials (which is how I read the post) then there shouldn't be any C in the EC, at least to my way of thinking.

Bottom line is that we can take all exposure control away from the camera if desired.

Anton, as I state above, coming from Nikon where exposure can be based on the entire frame or just the focus point (which Canon doesn't have for some reason), EC factors in greatly, especially in wildlife situations where we have dark birds against bright backgrounds or constantly changing conditions with animals moving. I'm constantly spinning the back dial to over or under expose the frame so my subject is perfect.

I'm not an EC user and I'm actually pretty interested in how people use EC. Assuming your shutter and aperture are already locked down, how does spinning up EC differ from spinning up ISO? EC seems to be intended for ongoing exposure offset, rather than shot-to-shot offset.

I also shoot dynamically changing subjects (white jerseys, then black, then pale skin, then dark) and I see the in-camera metering swing wildly while the actual exposure stays the same. For nearly all cases I stay in full manual to prevent problems. If athletes are running in and out of shade, though, there's no sense trying to control this myself. That's just a terrible scene anyway, with light changing by two stops within the frame and major WB issues.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

I'm not an EC user and I'm actually pretty interested in how people use EC. Assuming your shutter and aperture are already locked down, how does spinning up EC differ from spinning up ISO? EC seems to be intended for ongoing exposure offset, rather than shot-to-shot offset.

If you're 100% manual then it doesn't matter. For most of my shooting I'm dealing with ever changing metering conditions. With wildlife they move in and out of shadows and backgrounds are ever changing, so I lock down shutter speed and aperture for the scenario and use Auto ISO almost exclusively (so yes, we're both using some level of automatic shooting, as is every other wildlife photographer I follow in certain situations). Exposure compensation is generally set a -1/3 or -2/3 depending on the day so I don't blow out fur and feather detail. I may have to crank it to +1 if I'm shooting a dark bird flying against a cloudy, sunless sky or all I get is a perfectly exposed background.

In a less volatile environment I would be exposing for each shot. But again, we're both coming from Nikon systems where automatic exposure can be tied to your focus point, so even what the meter is telling you is not what you want. It's been a long time ask for Canon users, even before I switched, and that they don't yet offer it as an option is one thing I cannot understand. Until then I'll be spinning the EC wheel.

 

[AntonLargiader]

Thanks for the great explanation; I think I get it now. You (and Nige and others) let auto-ISO meter and adjust the overall scene as you pan from bright to dark, and you apply EC to that to correct for the subject tonality.

Back to the earlier point; I've never really looked into the AF point linked metering, although I've certainly read complaints about it. Just tried spot metering; yeah I can see how that really needs to follow the AF point tracking!

 

[Dcweather]

Hi Jake,
Goodness, a Swindon Band!
Onto the Canon R5, I am also using the 100-500 lens. It's a lot of fun and very versatile, with the eye detection a game changer.
I don't think the low light performance is particularly good, anything above about 2000 ISO on a recent trip to Jamaica and Guyana needed rescuing with Topaz Denoise, of course the 7.1 limit on the 100-500 doesn't help.
My main problem is with shooting manual. I used to shoot manual with the D500 happily enough, but with the Canon the exposure compensation takes on a life of its own. With A, S and ISO all controllable with different wheels the only one I don't control is the Exposure Compensation. I've had particular trouble at night, and have missed some owl shots when the exposure has decided to amp up to make the camera unusable.
I do find the focus point can wander and though its an easy fix with the joystick it can be annoying. Likewise even with ISO on auto (up to 12,800) sometimes the ISO decides to not be auto!
All in all though it's a very versatile camera, I stuck my head in the sand for a couple of years when development stopped for SLRs and am glad I made the switch.
Cheers
Nige
I'm attaching a few photos from Guyana.View attachment 27655View attachment 27656
View attachment 27658View attachment 27659
View attachment 27657View attachment 27660

I came from Nikon D500 to Canon R7 and now R8 as well (to help with AF and the noise issue). I've got the control ring progged for exposure compensation and EVF to show actual exposure so have actually found that one of the big plusses from DSLR