# Camera overexposing film



## brooklyn35 (Feb 25, 2015)

Hey all,

Over the holidays my father bequeathed to me his 1972 Olympus OM-1. Its been siting in his closet for the better part of two decades and despite this appeared to be in great shape. 

I went out bought a bunch of film and put a roll of b&w 400 ISO in my camera. I know that 400 ISO can be had to work with but I figured that  with a high aperture and fast shutter speeds would make it workable. No mater what I set the camera at the light meter was telling me it was over exposed. Next I tired 200 ISO and half way through that roll I wondered if the battery powering the light meter was dead so I replaced it. The light meter seemed a tad more responsive but no dice. When I developed the roll all but 2 photos were over exposed. So I tried 100 ISO same story. Yesterday I put a roll of 50 ISO in and went to take a photo in broad daylight at F16 with a shutter speed of 1000 and the camera still said overexposed. I happened to have my DSLR with me and the photos came out great at F11 and 160. 

So what is going on? Since this is my first film camera I don't have enough knowledge to trouble shoot it. Since the film is overexposed it's not just a light meter issue. Also, it can't be a film issue since I've tried several different varieties of film. I've tried three different lenses and same issues on all of them. Could it be something I'm doing wrong?


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 25, 2015)

Silly question, but are you setting the ISO on the camera?


----------



## brooklyn35 (Feb 25, 2015)

Not a silly question at all! And yes I am  and I just triple checked it!


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

Not sure what you call overexposed film. HOW LOOKS THE NEGATIVE ? According to your story you actually under exposed the film about 4 stops, so, how looks the neg. The best, stick a piece of this negative to the window glass and and make with your dslr picture of it (against the light) and show it to us.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 26, 2015)

Good catch, timor.  Never thought of it actually under-exposing.  But the OP says the meter says it's overexposing.  So if that's the case, the negs will be very dark.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

Doesn't matter, what says meter, after 20 years of shelf electronics might be crazy. What worries me is something else.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

480sparky said:


> Good catch, timor.  Never thought of it actually under-exposing.  But the OP says the meter says it's overexposing.  So if that's the case, the negs will be very dark.


If the camera was set to 1/1000 f16 you can't over exposed ISO 400, even on extremely bright, tropical beach.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 26, 2015)

Maybe there's some very slight build-up on the internal metering contacts and such...the standard fix was always to turn the meter on and run the aperture and shutter controls though their full range of movements multiple,multiple times. Also, make SURE to clean the battery compartment contacts very thoroughly with a clean cloth, maybe even a tiny bit of alcohol on a cloth on the external battery door, being careful never to get any liquid inside the camera itself. ALSO, the batteries themselves: gotta make SURE they have absolutely no finger oils on them: I have "fixed" many defective light meters by cleaning the batteries themselves,and putting them back in without toughing the contact surface with my fingers. Not sure what the OM uses for batteries, but the small batteries camera meters use have so little contact area that immaculate contacts and immaculate battery surface area are both important.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 26, 2015)

Take the battery out and use a handheld meter


----------



## cgw (Feb 26, 2015)

The OM-1 took a long-departed PX625 mercury cell. If there's a dying alkaline "replacement" cell in place it's quite likely not giving anything close to accurate readings. Then there's the possibility the metering circuitry is smoked.


----------



## compur (Feb 26, 2015)

Not too long ago I tested the meter on an OM-1 using a current alkaline battery "equivalent" to the mercury battery that the meter was made for and found that with the alkaline battery the meter was 4 stops off (don't recall if over or under)  so my conclusion was not to use alkaline batteries in OM-1s. An MR-9 battery adapter + silver oxide S76 cell is one solution to that issue.

But, besides that I also second Derrel's comments above and would add that the meter on your OM-1 may simply be broken.


----------



## bribrius (Feb 26, 2015)

compur said:


> Not too long ago I tested the meter on an OM-1 using a current alkaline battery "equivalent" to the mercury battery that the meter was made for and found that with the alkaline battery the meter was 4 stops off (don't recall if over or under)  so my conclusion was not to use alkaline batteries in OM-1s. An MR-9 battery adapter + silver oxide S76 cell is one solution to that issue.
> 
> But, besides that I also second Derrel's comments above and would add that the meter on your OM-1 may simply be broken.


i use wein cells for the 625's. Keeps it 1.35 volts. if using the 1.5 volts i lie to the camera and adjust the asa film speed accordingly. so if you are running under exposed with four hundred move your asa up.  If you have anything that takes 675's i cam using hearing aid batteries for that. I have like 80 of them because you can get them for 10 bucks for 40 of them at costco, ebay, about anywhere. The aren't that great but for the price pretty much disposable anyway. One of my meter needles seems to "stick " occasionaly. Dust, dirt, too many years.........  with that i kind of pay closer attention to it and make sure it is floating freely before i lock it down. Old cameras develop quirks.   two cents. Probably not very helpful.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

This battery or that battery or no battery at all ( as long as it fires the shutter), doesn't matter. With settings of 1/1000 and f/16 you can't over expose even ISO 400 even in very bright conditions. My guess is camera reads always the max aperture and fires always with max aperture without regard to what is set to.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 26, 2015)

gsgary said:


> Take the battery out and use a handheld meter



Or just use the Sunny 16 rule.

Perhaps you know of a friend with a DSLR.  Get together and see if the meters between your film and their DSLR concur.


----------



## Designer (Feb 26, 2015)

brooklyn35 said:


> Its been siting in his closet for the better part of two decades


Shutters get sticky from non-use.  Try checking the shutter speeds.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 26, 2015)

Designer said:


> brooklyn35 said:
> 
> 
> > Its been siting in his closet for the better part of two decades
> ...



That is something most people can do........ up to 1/15 or maybe 1/30th.  Faster than that, and one needs specialized gear.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

480sparky said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Take the battery out and use a handheld meter
> ...


He just said they don't. Dslr was showing 1/160 f/11 for good exposure, OM1 was at 1/1000 f/16 and still meter shows over exposure.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

Designer said:


> brooklyn35 said:
> 
> 
> > Its been siting in his closet for the better part of two decades
> ...


Sticky shutters don't cause meter misreadings. Camera doesn't know it will be slower due to non-use. Meter is getting wrong information and camera is letting too much light inside. I just wonder, how looks this over exposed negative, but I think we will never know, I think OP was spooked.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 26, 2015)

It's making up for being shut in the cupboard fot 20 years and soaking up as much light as possible


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 26, 2015)

I've heard that CdS and selenium cells can degrade over time. If that's the case, it may not be worth fixing.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Feb 26, 2015)

On a bright sunny day I'd expect a needle on a meter to be 'lively', it should react and move immediately when exposed to bright sunlight. You could try that, not necessarily with film in the camera, to see what it's doing.

I have cameras older than that and the meter is still working but have some that have nonworking meters; with this camera you might need to use a handheld meter (or if you have another camera with you I've used that to meter in a pinch).


----------



## gsgary (Feb 26, 2015)

This is why all my film cameras but 1 don't have meters so I don't get stuck looking for batteries


----------



## bribrius (Feb 26, 2015)

timor said:


> This battery or that battery or no battery at all ( as long as it fires the shutter), doesn't matter. With settings of 1/1000 and f/16 you can't over expose even ISO 400 even in very bright conditions. My guess is camera reads always the max aperture and fires always with max aperture without regard to what is set to.


this just made me have a thought. I wonder if it isn't the camera at all but the lens... ap ring. Maybe he doesnt have it set on ae. on the lens. Dont know much about this camera or setup just throwing it out there. Maybe he has it in me and is reading it wrong..


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 26, 2015)

Silly me:

Does it still say you're overexposed with the lens cap on?


----------



## brooklyn35 (Feb 26, 2015)

Hey all,

Thanks for the replies. I guess I should have posted I've been an amateur photographer for awhile now. So please believe me when I say the photos are overexposed. I'll post a few negatives and photos tomorrow but the negatives are pretty light.

Timor I assure, with my camera at least, it's very possible to overexpose at those settings.

Derrel, I'll double check the battery when I get home. I didn't really put any attention when I put the battery in. I did check for corrosion when I took the old out and was relived to see there was none. I'll try cycling through all the settings when I finish the current roll of film.

Compur I'm looking into getting the battery adapter however until I know the camera actually isn't totally FUBAR I'm trying to put as little money into it as possible.

Bribrius I currently have an alkine 1.35v in there which should be comerable to a Wein. Your post was helpful thank you very much! Please forgive my ignorance but what is an ap ring? The camera is completely manual with no ae or af.

Designer the shutter seems to move freely and normally.

480 sparky, I've checked it against my own DSLR several times and my friend's early 90s film SLR. Both say that something is wrong with my 35.

I'll try to post a few shots of the negatives when I get home later tonight. In the mean time here are some shots from the 200 roll. I regret to say the 400 roll was lost by Duane Reade or Fuji film depending on what you choose to believe. I haven't gotten the chance to drop off the 100 yet.

Thanks again for the replies! I'll put up the negatives as soon as I can. Don't worry you all haven't spooked me quite  yet!


----------



## Designer (Feb 26, 2015)

#1 very blurry.  What was the shutter speed?  

#2 pretty good, although sideways.


----------



## brooklyn35 (Feb 26, 2015)

Designer said:


> #1 very blurry.  What was the shutter speed?
> 
> #2 pretty good, although sideways.



I know that photo my friend accidentally elbowed me when I was taking it so I jumped abit. The second one really looks washed out to me. It was a somewhat dark day.


----------



## Designer (Feb 26, 2015)

If these are prints done by the film processing company, they may have adjusted the exposure (it's done in the printing machine) to give you a better photograph.  If they got the sky "wrong" it still looks good to me, particularly in the area of the dark window frames, etc.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

brooklyn35 said:


> I'll post a few negatives and photos tomorrow but the negatives are pretty light.
> 
> Timor I assure, with my camera at least, it's very possible to overexpose at those settings.
> 
> ...


AP ring is a Bribrius slang for "aperture ring". 
If the negatives are "pretty light" it indicates under exposure, over exposure makes negs dark.  OK, I think the meter is toasted. If you develop own b&w shoot one roll with setting taken from your dslr, develop for normal contrast and let see.
Pictures you post by now are showing only  small over exposure, but then I would not trust too much labs developing colour film nowadays.
Keep shooting dry in very bright conditions, maybe the current will revive dried up condensers, Olympus after all was using good stuff, supposedly.


----------



## bribrius (Feb 26, 2015)

timor said:


> brooklyn35 said:
> 
> 
> > I'll post a few negatives and photos tomorrow but the negatives are pretty light.
> ...


well i was going to say something else too. rtfm.  It may not help here though. i know i punched up one of my old camera manuals online the other day because i didn't know how to do the battery check. I didn't want to insult the o.p though and this is could be something other than user error. still wonder if there is a difference if he swaps lenses too. Don't know about anyone else but if the battery was in order and the needle floated fine i think my next step would be doubting the lens and toss another one on there just to make sure i wasn't missing something. i would also be looking at the difference between manual mode and shutter pri or whatever this is and make sure i am in the right one looking at the needle the right way.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 26, 2015)

I would fire a few frames with the lens set to f/16 or f/11 and see if the lens diaphragm is actually stopping down to shooting aperture. I mean, if f/16 at 1/1000 second is over-exposed with 400 ISO film, then my guess would be that the LENS is the culprit. As far as focal plane shutters getting sticky with age, that is not my experience. Leaf shutters, yeah, sure, but modern focal plane shutters are usually pretty reliable, although on mechanically-timed cameras the top speeds like 1/1000 often can run slow-ish, like 1/750 to maybe even as slow as 1/500.

LENS diaphragms on the other hand, can easily get sluggish, or crap out. My 35mm f/2 AF-D's diaphragm crapped out this summer....shoots everything at a beautiful f/2.0, no matter the aperture setting! So, you need to literally LOOK and see with your own eyes if the lens is actually closing down to the selected, smaller shooting apertures. Oddly, the ONLY other lens that I have owned that has had the diaphragm conk out in the middle of a shoot was a 1969-vintage Nikon 35mm f/1.4 that I owned back in the mid-1980's.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

bribrius said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > brooklyn35 said:
> ...


He said, he tried three different lenses.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2015)

Derrel said:


> I would fire a few frames with the lens set to f/16 or f/11 and see if the lens diaphragm is actually stopping down to shooting aperture. I mean, if f/16 at 1/1000 second is over-exposed with 400 ISO film, then my guess would be that the LENS is the culprit. As far as focal plane shutters getting sticky with age, that is not my experience. Leaf shutters, yeah, sure, but modern focal plane shutters are usually pretty reliable, although on mechanically-timed cameras the top speeds like 1/1000 often can run slow-ish, like 1/750 to maybe even as slow as 1/500.
> 
> LENS diaphragms on the other hand, can easily get sluggish, or crap out. My 35mm f/2 AF-D's diaphragm crapped out this summer....shoots everything at a beautiful f/2.0, no matter the aperture setting! So, you need to literally LOOK and see with your own eyes if the lens is actually closing down to the selected, smaller shooting apertures. Oddly, the ONLY other lens that I have owned that has had the diaphragm conk out in the middle of a shoot was a 1969-vintage Nikon 35mm f/1.4 that I owned back in the mid-1980's.


Hm. How many foot-candles you need to overexpose ISO 400 shooting at f/16 and 1/1000 sec ? Pics he posted looks rather slightly underexposed with washed out colours and weak contrast.


----------



## Cruzingoose (Mar 7, 2015)

The exposure difference between the original mercury battery 625, 1.35v and an adapter (amuminum foil wrapped around a a76) is about a 1/2 stop. The variable resistor for the aperature is likely "dusty". Work both the shutter speed and aperature back and forth quickly for about 30 seconds each and the problem will clear up.... IF there are no major mechanical faults.


----------

