Timeline for Nikon d5100 producing extremely underexposed images
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 5, 2020 at 15:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhotos/status/1335237526345355271 | ||
| Feb 2, 2015 at 19:54 | comment | added | TribeofHenry | Seeing as how I had always had auto ISO enabled, this was very unexpected for me. Just continuing my photographic education | |
| Feb 2, 2015 at 19:43 | comment | added | Philip Kendall♦ | I know this has now been answered, but I'm not seeing anything in these photos which is unexpected - fluorescent lights are not "brightly lit" in absolute terms, so unless you do something to crank the exposure way up (high ISO, slow shutter, much faster aperture than f/3.5) then your sample photos are exactly what I'd expect to see. | |
| Feb 2, 2015 at 15:21 | vote | accept | TribeofHenry | ||
| Feb 2, 2015 at 14:28 | answer | added | TribeofHenry | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 31, 2015 at 2:28 | answer | added | Astroram | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 31, 2015 at 0:53 | comment | added | Michael C | Is the mechanical link on the camera just inside the flange that controls aperture bent? This can cause weird exposure inconsistencies. As you look into the camera's light box with no lens mounted it will be on the left. Here is a link to another answer to another question with an image of the lever. photo.stackexchange.com/a/58070/15871 | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 6:49 | comment | added | Russell McMahon | I was going to suggest cleaning the oil film off the lens (or mirror) but I don't know how it got there. But Mitch's suggestion sounds good - you weren't using an ND filter just before that , were you ? Or loaned your camera to somebody to try something. Or ... . | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 5:36 | comment | added | Mitch Goshorn | Tried another lens? Made sure some joker hasn't left an ND filter on your lens? | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 5:29 | answer | added | Rob Clement | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 5:21 | comment | added | Russell McMahon | Is this with more than one lens? If you have more than one, try several. | If you have only one and regardless, unseat lens and reseat several times. Lens to body contact issues can cause VERY strange problems. | If still no go the 99% chance it's dead. | Reset everything (as you have done). | On averagely lit say manually set to 100 ISO, f8,1/125th s. What do you get? | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:58 | comment | added | MikeW | You could look through the lens as well, to check the aperture and the approx. shutter speed (set to 0.5 second and make sure shutter is actually open that amount of time, and mirror locking up completely) | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:57 | comment | added | MikeW | I would try reseating the lens, or using another one. Then vary aperture (in Manual) from 3.5 to f/11 or 16 and make sure the images get darker. If not, maybe everything is taking at the minimum aperture for some reason. | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:50 | history | edited | MikeW | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 75 characters in body
|
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:46 | comment | added | TribeofHenry | No flash. Never needed it in this setting before. | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:43 | comment | added | inkista | Are you using flash? | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:19 | history | edited | TribeofHenry | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 225 characters in body
|
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:04 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:23 | |||||
| Jan 30, 2015 at 4:03 | history | asked | TribeofHenry | CC BY-SA 3.0 |