Mark W Loc: Camden, Maine

Only for those you don't understand how to use it properly.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

I'm coming late to this discussion, and many excellent points have already been made. It looks as though you came to Muir Woods sideways!

The lighting in Redwood groves is very challenging, I would personally select spot metering in such a location, and then maybe adjust exp comp to taste.

Interesting though. I'll look at the EXIF data later.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

You know, there really is a reason why cameras that have Matrix Metering ALSO have other options for metering (Center weighted, spot, whatever). In Matrix, the way that Nikon explains it, the meter reads "patterns of light" and cross-references them with a data base of 1000s of photographs to determine/guess what it is that you are shooting and how to expose for it. Move the camera, change the light pattern, and the meter makes a new guess. Auto ISO is just another way of compensating the exposure in this case. Had it not been engaged, the camera would have, most likely, adjusted the SS or F-stop to give the EV diference your images show.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Thats why I use spot focus as well as spot metering. Even so most of my shots are handled by delete.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

In the woods, definitely, but only if bears are present.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

I've heard that cougars can also induce the same reaction!

twowindsbear

I'll add my WAG:

You had your camera on a tripod. In the 'properly exposed' pix, you had the eyepiece covered - either you were looking into the viewfinder, or you were standing near enough that you effectively blocked the eyepiece. In the 'oddball' exposure, light entered the viewfinder & influenced the exposure.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I thought the 758 had a 1 degree spot meter....
But it can be fooled in certain situations too.
The other night I was using mine to meter the full moon.
Yet the moon fit totally inside the spot target and included a circle of darker sky around the moon. I would have preferred to just have only the bright moon in the spot meter, but it was simply too small. But it is better than the spot meter that is on my camera because the spot is smaller IIRC. So, the point is that even with a great light meter the user still has to understand and interpret the result.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

I beg to differ. It may depend on the camera but my 5dIII is outstanding on Auto ISO.

Rockwell says Auto ISO on the Nikon df is excellent. It does get some questionable grade on autofocus because "39 points, mostly all crammed into the center of the FX image" . The photos were taken 3 minutes apart, did the light change?

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I was thinking of that old expression, "Do bears s*** in the woods?"

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Light meters... Yikes, one more thing to learn... instead you have the Histogram which will give you a great deal of info. The less stuff you carry the better.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/how-read-your-cameras-histogram?BI=572&kw=&c3api=0980%2C106232511053&gclid=Cj0KCQjwub7NBRDJARIsAP7wlT-505Np86cf9LgoHESgVnCGMDwi6kYUoeU2cZXxNi-AqjqY2Ns4BFUaAn5uEALw_wcB

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Matrix metering is more sophisticated than center weighted metering. Incident light reading is not fool proof either but it avoids some of the problems of reflected light readings.

I have seen Nikon's explanation of matrix metering. It is an oversimplification. Nikon did not want to go beyond the marketing language. It does not, of course, mean that there are 1000s of images squirreled away somewhere in your camera. It means that they took 1000s of images that were correctly exposed and correlated their matrix readings to the correct exposure so that they could take the result (a small number of patterns with varying levels) and pick a reasonable exposure/ISO setting. It has a very high success rate but it is not perfect. Neither are center weighted or spot metering whether it is done by the camera or with an external meter.

However, what this example illustrates is that The best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ Men Gang aft agley, (can get screwed up). This can happen whenever you abdicate your judgement to a program built into a camera.

A camera might do some things quicker than you can. But if you think it is smarter than you are at making exposure/ISO decisions, a small minority of you may be right. The rest of us know better. We either don't trust the camera's meter or we trust but verify.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

The moon covers only a 30 minute ark, half the diameter of a 1 degree spot meter and therefor only a quarter of the area.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

That's probably the most reasonable explanation so far.

BebuLamar

Only that was not it. I use the camera handheld and use the viewfinder. My question is not about the meter is right or wrong but rather why the 5 shots had about the same exposure but one is more than 2 stops less.