So you are saying that exposure characteristics for film and digital are different. Would that also imply that exposure of film is the more accurate one resembling the raw light data from a good light meter?
Coming from a pure digital background and only using matrix metering all my life i am trying to convince myself that something is not right about me using a point and shoot as a meter reading. I dont mind buying a good light meter but i need more help to explain the shortcomings of my P&S meter. Can someone show me some practical situation where a light meter will be better?
Or should i just keep doing what i am doing now until i find by experience that a light meter is better?