----------
>From: tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation
>Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001, 6:59 PM
>
> Nicholas Wright wrote:
>>
>> I strongly agree with Pal on this one... this also harkens back to the same
>> arguments that have been passing through this lists. The biggest complaint
>> that manual camera users have against auotmated cameras is that it does
>> everything for you and ppl do not know what the camera is doing.
>
> Well, I'm not exactly a manual focus camera apologist, but in this case
> you *don't*.
Huh? I'm sorry, maybe it's late, but I don't quite understand what you're
saying here. Also, I just realized that I did not type my statement
correctly, for that I apologize. It should have read something along the
lines of "One of the biggest complaints that I percieve that manual..."
Sorry for any misunderstanding in that regard. It should be noted that I am
a big proponent of manual cameras in certain situations.
> I think matrix metering is a rather misleading term...it should really
> be labelled "programmed metering" or something like that. When you seen
> the exposure reading from a center-weighted meter in your finder, you're
> seeing what the meter sees. When you see a MM reading, you're seeing how
> the camera's programming interprets the various EI's from the different
> segments.
>
> I suppose you could get a feel for what a certain camera's MM will do in
> certain situations, but I was suprised often enough that I don't really
> try anymore, unless I'm shooting color neg film that I can let someone
> else worry about.
>
>> The thing
>> that I always wonder is "If manual camera users can through experimentation
>> learn what their cameras are doing (meter wise) why cannot auto camera users
>> do the same thing?" Well we can and we do...
>
> Except in this case the experimentation would have to be much more
> thorough.
I'm not sure that this is entirely correct. True, the multi-segment metering
will adjust exposure according to the way the computer percieves the scene,
but if you know your camera you will also know how the computer will
percieve that scene so you can make the adjustments that you see fit.
>> Anyway the point of this post
>> is to share with you this URL from Moose Peterson's web site which contains
>> the procedure for a simple test that you can use to determine what your
>> cameras matrix metering will be doing under certain circumstances. It
>> requires slide film a notebook and some time... Hope this helps! :)
>>
>> http://www.moose395.net/howto/teddybear.html
>
> I think his test is simplistic. I don't often shoot a single colored
> subject against a simple evenly-lit background.
His test is not simply a single colored subject with an evenly lit
background. His test involves two stuffed bears (one white, one dark)
against several different background lighting conditions. It may not be a
totally 100% complete test, but it would give someone with an unfamiliar
camera a huge step towards understanding what the matrix metering is doing.
> The biggest problem for me with MM are point source lights...a lamp or
> window in the background. When that's the case you'd have to take into
> consideration what segment it's in, how much brighter then everything
> else it is...I can't think that fast, and I probably couldn't compute it
> anyway.
I have never been guilty of the error of saying that MM (or any other
method, piece of equipment, etc) is the cure all for every situation. One
reason that there will ~always~ (well as long as they can be repaired
anyway) be a pz-1p in my bag is the ability to switch metering modes
"on-the-fly."
> Having said all that, I find that MM gives me a decent exposure 90% of
> the time, and if I only sent neg film to a lab, that would be fine.
> However, that 10%, and the other 20 or 30% that are "pretty close" give
> me a hell of a time when printing my own negs.
>
> tv
Again, I am ~not~ saying that MM is the perfect solution. In fact, I will be
the first to admit that my best photos (no exceptions) were taken using the
zone system with spot meter. And when the time presents itself, or when
lighting conditions dictate (as in the above mentioned "light source in
photos") I will always switch to spot. But for journalistic stuff where one
or so stop exposure error means less than the content of the photo it's
matrix all the way.
--
Blessings,
Nick
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
