Which metering method do you use? Why? (Page 6): Understood. My point was that whether or not manual controls are used to override the camera's settings, as you say, the camera has...

waegwan Loc: Mae Won Li

lamiaceae wrote:

I don't know the controls of either of u your /u ... (show quote)

Understood. My point was that whether or not manual controls are used to override the camera's settings, as you say, the camera has to be set to one of the modes built into the camera and no mode is not an option.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

drmike99 wrote:

My first serious camera was my Nikon F Photomic FTN and one of its features was center-weighted metering. That's what I learned on and that's my default for my DSLR also. Inconsistently, for my 3 medium format 120 film cameras I primarily use a hand-held Minolta Spot Meter, or occasionally a Sekonic Incident meter.

And, the F3 had a very unique center weighted system as a default. I was the most center weighted system Nikon ever produced as a center weighted default exposure system. I believe is was something like 70-30 or maybe even 80-20, getting old, can't remember exactly, but the system worked great for me as a wedding photographer, great bride portraits produced with this camera. Loved those old film Nikon's, FTN, F2AS, F2S, F2SB, F2A, F3HP, F4s, used them all, loved them all.

BebuLamar

billnikon wrote:

And, the F3 had a very unique center weighted system as a default. I was the most center weighted system Nikon ever produced as a center weighted default exposure system. I believe is was something like 70-30 or maybe even 80-20, getting old, can't remember exactly, but the system worked great for me as a wedding photographer, great bride portraits produced with this camera. Loved those old film Nikon's, FTN, F2AS, F2S, F2SB, F2A, F3HP, F4s, used them all, loved them all.

Traditional Nikon CW was 60/40. The F3 went to 80/20 mostly due to the the fact that its metering cell is at the bottom of the mirror box and not in the viewfinder. Modern Nikon CW is 75/25 with the size of the center area adjustable in settings.

Angmo

My Rolleiflex (MF film) seems to be metered on the lower have of the view screen.

Exposures were always great us its meter. Still prefer incident lighting sources for exposure.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I use spot metering almost exclusively. That allows me to meter a specific area of the scene. Then, I can adjust the camera settings to place that portion of the scene in the Zone I wish.
--Bob

fourlocks wrote:

On my Nikon, I routinely adjust aperture, speed an... (show quote)

waegwan Loc: Mae Won Li

rmalarz wrote:

I use spot metering almost exclusively. That allows me to meter a specific area of the scene. Then, I can adjust the camera settings to place that portion of the scene in the Zone I wish.
--Bob

Dittio

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

[deleted]

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Eric2018 wrote:

I almost always use spot metering. But which is best or most appropriate? Whichever method gets you the image you are trying to create.
-- Eric

That is interesting. What do you shoot that almost always requires spot metering? I use it only when I think the subject and the lighting call for it, which is a relatively small percentage of the time.

waegwan Loc: Mae Won Li

mwsilvers wrote:

That is interesting. What do you shoot that almost always requires spot metering? I use it only when I think the subject and the lighting call for it, which is a relatively small percentage of the time.

Which metering option do you normally use and why?

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

mwsilvers wrote:

That is interesting. What do you shoot that almost always requires spot metering? I use it only when I think the subject and the lighting call for it, which is a relatively small percentage of the time.

Respect your opinions enormously.

I have spot metered since film days. Pick an object and place it on the proper zone. Digital technology has changed things a bit, but the basic principle seems the same.

I’d be interested in your normal exposure selection process.

Andy

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Why can't we just keep it simple with EVF ? Use Matrix metering and exposure compensation to PLACE your object in the zone of your choice. What you see is what you get. You have placed your main object where you want it zone wise while still being cognizant of highlights. Now just adjust the rest in post.

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

That may be fine if one is shooting with a camera with EVF, otherwise not so helpful for non EVF shooting.

MrBob wrote:

Why can't we just keep it simple with EVF ? Use Matrix metering and exposure compensation to PLACE your object in the zone of your choice. What you see is what you get. You have placed your main object where you want it zone wise while still being cognizant of highlights. Now just adjust the rest in post.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Notorious T.O.D. wrote:

That may be fine if one is shooting with a camera with EVF, otherwise not so helpful for non EVF shooting.

I hear you T.O.D , on my Canons I just burn a test shot or two, Chimp and adjust. It just seems to me that for static landscape subjects, it is so simple to just adjust with EC irregardless whether you look at your EVR or Chimp... BTW, why would anyone not want to Chimp and view the results of the settings ! I have no Purist aspirations of multiple spot readings and setting everything manual. I like the K.I.S.S. principle. Like everything else, there is no one way for everyone; do what works for you and is most comfortable.

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

I’m not much of a chimper but shoot mostly action and sports. I shoot in RAW and PP as needed. I have never used Live View much at all either.

MrBob wrote:

I hear you T.O.D , on my Canons I just burn a tes... (show quote)