Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,601   Posts: 1,622,405   Online: 682
      
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 52
  1. #41
    dehk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    W Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    889
    I've learned from all the years that, without matrix I can get more predictable results.
    - Derek
    [ Insert meaningless camera listing here ]

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    198
    Images
    5
    It does seem wrong really to lump all matrix metering together. The difference between the 25 segment metering in the F4 and the 1005 pixel RGB sensor in the F5/F6 is large, the latter distinguishing colour temperature as well, surely the difference in outcome cannot be minimal? Whilst the changes may only affect a small percentage of shots it is the confidence in those outlier situations that makes all the difference.
    If you have only shot with an F4 say it must be wrong to dismiss all matrix metering implementations?
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/red_eyes_man/

    Photographer not a job description - a diagnosis.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    262
    That about sums it up for me as well. You can talk about all the advantages of matrix but when it's said and done I get a higher percentage of good exposures using CW. I am able to more accurately predict and compensate in CW than matrix. Add to that the fact that I have many different bodies ranging from Nikon F's all the way up to a D300, trying to keep up with how each matrix system on those bodies that have them responds is just an added level of unnecessary complexity with no benefit and in some cases is a detriment. CW response is simpler making interpolation of required exposure settings simpler and for me that makes shooting CW more accurate and more fun.


    Quote Originally Posted by dehk View Post
    I've learned from all the years that, without matrix I can get more predictable results.

  4. #44
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,843
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    One of the advantages of matrix metering that has not been talked about yet here is the ability to do balanced fill flash. Once you "get" what it does and then see what it does it can become really handy for many situations.

    Ever wonder why a lot of newspaper shooters have a strobe on the camera mid-day?
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  5. #45
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,971
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by BradleyK View Post
    Despite owning an F4(e), a couple of F5s and an F6, I have yet to ever use the "matrix" metering function on any of these cameras. Why not? Mostly because I prefer using manual focus lenses when shooting with my SLRs. Since the F5 does not allow use of matrix metering with manual focus lenses, and I often shoot with several bodies, I almost always have the cameras set to the same center-weighted setting. So, a couple of questions for owners of Nikons with matrix capabilities, and more narrowly, to those who shoot transparency films. 1. What is your overall assessment of matrix metering? 2. Are their particular shooting situations where you would avoid using the setting? 3. Are their any particular transparency films that do not lend themselves to matrix metering?
    the answer can be summed up in one word'amazing.Nikon's matrix metering has never let me down.for me,it replaced zone-system metering;just let a Nikon handle it and transfer the settingsto a manual camera.the built-in logic is nothing short of fantastic.well done Nikon.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  6. #46
    wiltw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    887
    OK, folks, let's test matrix metering in a situation like this one...



    Imagine the grey card is backlit the head of a person, shot against a bright sky, in this case the sky is 6.8EV brighter than the grey card (this test shot made at 8:30am on a Fall morning). Shown is the result of a spot metered exposure on grey card target.
    How well does your Matrix metering work -- with zero Exposure Compensation dialed in by you? (I'll post my result after a few of you have results)


  7. #47
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,843
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltw View Post
    with zero Exposure Compensation dialed in by you? [/IMG]
    While I have done this type of shot without compensation, and they regularly fall very workably, why in the world would I not apply a little experience/compensation?

    We "compensate" (or should) with every type of metering. What I'm getting at is that with center weighted meters or spot meters we "meter and reframe" which is a form of compensation; judgement is required with every metering technique.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  8. #48
    wiltw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    While I have done this type of shot without compensation, and they regularly fall very workably, why in the world would I not apply a little experience/compensation?

    We "compensate" (or should) with every type of metering. What I'm getting at is that with center weighted meters or spot meters we "meter and reframe" which is a form of compensation; judgement is required with every metering technique.
    The point of doing it with no EC is to determine what the programming inherently will do, so that folks can get an idea of how much EC to crank in...to set a baseline. After all, Nikon's Matrix metering (or Canon Evaluative) automatically puts in some mysterious 'fudge factor', but the user is certain not advised anything about the logic (at least not by Canon...does Nikon?)... while primary AF zone gets priority, the surrounding AF zones get factored in by some mysterious amount. That is exactly why a number of folks call matrix metering 'unpredictable'.

    You might know how much EC to crank in, but what about the poor person who is stepping up to an SLR from the point and shoot? This is a way of imparting some level of understanding of how the camera behaves, without intervention.

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    262
    I do balanced fill flash in CW manual, ap or sp all the time. No matrix meter needed.... Just expose for the scene correctly and set you flash up correctly and your set. Make sure you don't exceed the max flash sync speed when you set the shutter speed.

    Nikon F4 in manual exposure mode CW metering 80-200mm f/2.8 with SB-800 in TTL BL with -0.7 comp. Film E100G

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Kodak_E100G_F4_100720-016-X3.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	442.2 KB 
ID:	77644


    Nikon F4s in manual exposure mode CW metering 80-200mm f/2.8 with SB-800 in TTL BL with -0.7 comp. Film HP5 shot at ISO 3200 and pushed 3 stops.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20111201-01_019_Ilford-HP5-3200-X2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	378.4 KB 
ID:	77645

    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    One of the advantages of matrix metering that has not been talked about yet here is the ability to do balanced fill flash. Once you "get" what it does and then see what it does it can become really handy for many situations.

    Ever wonder why a lot of newspaper shooters have a strobe on the camera mid-day?
    Last edited by Lamar; 11-27-2013 at 10:36 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  10. #50
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,843
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltw View Post
    The point of doing it with no EC is to determine what the programming inherently will do, so that folks can get an idea of how much EC to crank in...to set a baseline. After all, Nikon's Matrix metering (or Canon Evaluative) automatically puts in some mysterious 'fudge factor', but the user is certain not advised anything about the logic (at least not by Canon...does Nikon?)... while primary AF zone gets priority, the surrounding AF zones get factored in by some mysterious amount. That is exactly why a number of folks call matrix metering 'unpredictable'.

    You might know how much EC to crank in, but what about the poor person who is stepping up to an SLR from the point and shoot? This is a way of imparting some level of understanding of how the camera behaves, without intervention.
    That's a worthwhile goal.

    The wild card though is the next step. If it's on slide film that test can be meaningful. With negatives maybe, maybe not. If the important parts of the image fall inside the normal latitude range of the film the exact placement is purely academic; the limits may be measurable with a densitometer but irrelevant in the print.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin