The Secret Cult of M-Manual Mode

[Gunny]

Howdy, everyone. I've been shooting for a little while now and occasionally lurking on this board. I really like the open exchange of ideas and constructive thoughts everyone expresses.

One thing I see recurring in a variety of forums is that one should use the Manual mode for taking photographs. I'd really like to understand the thought behind this. I understand P-Programmed mode, Aperture Priority and Shutter Priority. I usually always shoot non-studio portraits in Aperture Priority mode because I don't care about the shutter speed, so long as the lighting allows enough speed to stop the action. I also get the correlation between shutter, aperture, and ISO settings to correctly expose a photograph. Having said that...

it just seems much easier to photograph people (especially children) by setting the aperture, or manipulating only it, and not fiddling with a million settings while asking the subject to hood for a second. I reckon maybe I'm not quick enough, but the various modes are there for good reason, I thought. For me, depth of field is always the challenge in a good portrait so it seemed logical to tell the camera what you wanted and let it figure out the rest real quick like.

There are certainly situations that call for manual modes--creative, studio, etc. For those times, manual mode is certainly engaged, but I feel like people tend to think the ONLY way to shoot is in M-Manual mode. What do you typically shoot in?

Sometimes, I feel like if I'm not shooting in M-Manual mode, I cannot possibly be a photographer worth beans. Maybe that's true. What's your perspective on this?

[SusanH1970]

I think whatever mode you're shooting in, if it gets you the desired photograph, then it's fine.

I usually shoot in manual, but I've become so used to it that it's easy for me to adjust my settings super-fast. I started in P-mode, then shot in AV mode for a while, messed around with TV mode to practice shooting my son driving his quad, then started practicing in manual about a year ago.

At family parties and stuff I'll usually throw it on P mode, I don't want to think about it too much, lol (unless family members ask me to do a more formal portrait of them, then it's back to manual for those shots).

[Gunny]

Originally Posted by SusanH1970

I think whatever mode you're shooting in, if it gets you the desired photograph, then it's fine.

I usually shoot in manual, but I've become so used to it that it's easy for me to adjust my settings super-fast. I started in P-mode, then shot in AV mode for a while, messed around with TV mode to practice shooting my son driving his quad, then started practicing in manual about a year ago.

At family parties and stuff I'll usually throw it on P mode, I don't want to think about it too much, lol (unless family members ask me to do a more formal portrait of them, then it's back to manual for those shots).

I completely agree with you on the P mode at parties and family events. Thanks for your insight, Susan. Maybe I'll fiddle more with Manual. Do you feel there is something inherently BETTER by shooting in manual, or is it simply your comfort zone now?

[SusanH1970]

I just like the control I have with manual - I also do custom white balance in-camera. Both help me get the exposure and color I want in-camera so it's less time sitting at the computer. editing. That, and as I said before, yeah it is my comfort zone because I've been doing it for a long time. If I'm just shooting my kids out in the yard and the light is changing a lot, I'll throw it in AV mode, too. Sometimes it's just so worth it not to have to think about it, LOL.

[LeeR]

I agree that there tends to be a cult of manual and the implication that you aren't really a photographer until you go full manual. I rarely do that for several reasons. First, there are so many times when you do get that extra second to make a calculation and you can rely on the camera to get the exposure in a tiny fraction of a second allowing you grab those fleeting shots.
I do a lot of landscapes and use a spot meter to thoroughly evaluate the scene before pressing the shutter. I can't tell you how many times I have spent several minutes determining the exact exposure I want only to find that it is the same on the camera reccomeneded. That doesn't mean my time has been wasted; knowing those values will help me in PP, but it does show that metering systems are remarkably accurate and that switching to full manual just to be part of the cult is foolishness.

[naeno]

It's funny you mention this. I was just discussing it with my husband last night!

I shoot almost exclusively in Aperture Priority mode. I've fiddled some in Manual, but I mainly take pictures of children who don't stay still for long. I don't have a lot of time to mess with dials and such. I love my camera for the fact that it "gets it right" most of the time. My clients like my work, I like my work, everybody walks away happy! That's what matters most!

[mrdale]

I think shooting in manual mode is over-rated and misunderstood. We can only choose aperture OR shutter speed for a given scene, the other variable is a given for proper exposure. Depending on what I'm shooting I know whether I want to control aperture or shutter, set that and let the camera do the rest. As Lee R mentioned the camera is faster and quite accurate these days.

dale

[BigFuzzy]

The key for me is to understand how to shoot in M, so that you can choose to shoot in other modes. Because I can shoot in M, doesn't mean i always do. I shoot in AP mode a lot. If I use flash(either studio or hotshoe) I almost always shoot in M.

Or my recent montage efforts are all M since I need to ensure consistent exposure and WB since it would be impossible in any other mode.

I think the key is get to the point where you can choose.. until then, you're limited. The point is to give yourself ALL the options.

[Elmo]

To understand this Cult/practice one needs to look at the history of photography and metering. In my early days of photography a light meter was an “unnecessary luxury” owned by few. As they became more common their reliability still left something to be desired, so photographers still relied on instinct to set exposure.

Then along came color, and meters took another kick in the head as they failed to discern color related luminosity. So again the photographer had to rely on instinct for exposure. As time progressed on meter started being built into the camera itself. As it sensor was no thru the lens and it had an extremely wide field of view, they often read the light reflected off the bright shinny lens barrel. (Ever wondered why the modern lens is black not silver like the olden days, Canon knows.) More inaccurate readings again.

Then Thru-The-Lens metering, and we started getting a metering system that was usable. The trouble was folks started comparing their TTL readings against the handheld meters and got different readings. This added to the reputation that build in meters were totally inaccurate even though we knew the hand held was inaccurate.

Then came automatic cameras. The leading photographers said they will ruin photography, where is the skill? And here the cult started and well sit did because the automatic/programmed exposures could easily be deceived, if you wanted the best you still shot manual using the meter as always for a reference.

Today thing have changed. Built in metering has different modes allowing the photographer to properly meter and expose photographs. The camera is no longer easy to confuse if used properly, yet the cult remains. What the cult makes me think of is an auto mechanic who’s only wrench is a monkey wrench, and we know what happens when one throws a monkey wrench into the works.

It is time we quit beating out chest hollering “Me Manual” and learn to utilize the great tools we paid for. One only need look at the number of threads from those “Me Manual” want-a-be’s, to see the cult is not promoting photography.

All this from a guy who spent the first 40 years shoot manual, because that is all there was, but has learned there is a better way. “Me Av.”

[Gunny]

Originally Posted by LeeR

I agree that there tends to be a cult of manual and the implication that you aren't really a photographer until you go full manual. I rarely do that for several reasons. First, there are so many times when you do get that extra second to make a calculation and you can rely on the camera to get the exposure in a tiny fraction of a second allowing you grab those fleeting shots.
I do a lot of landscapes and use a spot meter to thoroughly evaluate the scene before pressing the shutter. I can't tell you how many times I have spent several minutes determining the exact exposure I want only to find that it is the same on the camera reccomeneded. That doesn't mean my time has been wasted; knowing those values will help me in PP, but it does show that metering systems are remarkably accurate and that switching to full manual just to be part of the cult is foolishness.

Some very good points and several I forgot in my original rant. The part you mentioned about the metering system being correct most of the time is so very true. Also, I do a lot of landscape stuff in manual mode, but the key difference between people is that the mountains rarely move around so that helps:-)

Thanks for your input!