I assume that if you do, you always move your focus point to your subject, and if not, you lock focus and recompose. Simple. My problem is that I don’t do either one consistently. I guess I should make up my mind and stick to one or the other. But for now, given that I switch back and forth, I think it makes the most sense not to lock them together. I’m not looking for some magic answer, but I’m curious—does anyone have an argument for linking them?
Sorry for a rather dumb question.
I use BBF for focus and lock the <center point> exposure where I want it and recompose.
Once I found out I could use BBF in my camera, I split those functions, never to be re-combine as one function.
Rab-Eye wrote:
I assume that if you do, you always move your focus point to your subject, and if not, you lock focus and recompose. Simple. My problem is that I don’t do either one consistently. I guess I should make up my mind and stick to one or the other. But for now, given that I switch back and forth, I think it makes the most sense not to lock them together. I’m not looking for some magic answer, but I’m curious—does anyone have an argument for linking them?
Sorry for a rather dumb question.
I assume that if you do, you always move your focu... (
show quote)
I don't use in-camera spot metering...I find that the "spot" is too large to be useful. I will occasionally use my Pentax Spotmeter V. Matrix or Center-Weighted metering seems to work better for me. For difficult situations (high contrast, misleading center of frame light levels), I just switch to Manual, meter as necessary, perhaps zooming to get rid of confusing elements, and lock in my exposure values. Keep in mind, though, that this approach won't work very cleanly if you float your ISO unless you fix one of the other variables and can set your ISO while framing. I could probably learn to do that with my D500, but it would be much harder with a D300s, because changing ISO requires both hands on that older camera.
larryepage wrote:
I don't use in-camera spot metering...I find that the "spot" is too large to be useful. I will occasionally use my Pentax Spotmeter V. Matrix or Center-Weighted metering seems to work better for me. For difficult situations (high contrast, misleading center of frame light levels), I just switch to Manual, meter as necessary, perhaps zooming to get rid of confusing elements, and lock in my expisure values. Keep in mind, though, that this approach won't work very cleanly if you float your ISO unless you fix one of the other variables and can set your ISO while framing. I could probably learn to do that with my D500, but it would be much harder with a D300s, because changing ISO requires both hands on that older camera.
I don't use in-camera spot metering...I find that ... (
show quote)
I just started trying Center Weighted Metering for Wildlife in some situations after having Auto ISO change rite in the middle of a burst a couple of times without any light change while using Matrix. Nikon D810.
Longshadow wrote:
I use BBF for focus and lock the <center point> exposure where I want it and recompose.
Once I found out I could use BBF in my camera, I split those functions, never to be re-combine as one function.
Hmm. I do use BBF. Interesting idea to lock exposure with the point in the center.
tcthome wrote:
I just started trying Center Weighted Metering for Wildlife in some situations after having Auto ISO change rite in the middle of a burst a couple of times without any light change while using Matrix. Nikon D810.
That’s interesting. Thanks.
BBF. Regarding wildlife / birding. I use matrix metering. If white birds on a bright day EC -1 1/2, cloudy day -1; IF black birds on a bright day EC +1 1/2, on a cloudy day +1.
Rab-Eye wrote:
I assume that if you do, you always move your focus point to your subject, and if not, you lock focus and recompose. Simple. My problem is that I don’t do either one consistently. I guess I should make up my mind and stick to one or the other. But for now, given that I switch back and forth, I think it makes the most sense not to lock them together. I’m not looking for some magic answer, but I’m curious—does anyone have an argument for linking them?
Sorry for a rather dumb question.
I assume that if you do, you always move your focu... (
show quote)
For me, focus is focus, and exposure is exposure, and "never the twain shall meet". Having independent parameters hooked to each other would drive me up the wall !
Using spot metering or centre weighted shows us that even small movements of the camera can have a huge effect on the exposure. Exposure lock will typically be followed by re-composition, which means that the brightness levels of the resulting capture could be vastly different from the scene that exposure lock was taken from. For that to work well, you would have to know exactly how the difference in light levels was going to affect the resulting capture. It's predictable that doing that in a fluid situation is going to be difficult. If you then add in the extra constraints that achieving focus lock at the same time will introduce and you have a situation that's going to be nearly impossible to control. My guess is that most people opt for separate focus lock and using something like matrix metering combined with exposure compensation (when needed).
R.G. wrote:
Using spot metering or centre weighted shows us that even small movements of the camera can have a huge effect on the exposure. Exposure lock will typically be followed by re-composition, which means that the brightness levels of the resulting capture could be vastly different from the scene that exposure lock was taken from. For that to work well, you would have to know exactly how the difference in light levels was going to affect the resulting capture. It's predictable that doing that in a fluid situation is going to be difficult. If you then add in the extra constraints that achieving focus lock at the same time will introduce and you have a situation that's going to be nearly impossible to control. My guess is that most people opt for separate focus lock and using something like matrix metering combinedmation assisted with exposure compensation (when needed).
Using spot metering or centre weighted shows us th... (
show quote)
I have this vague notion that you have just explained why automation assisted exposure can get tedious and distracting compared to the light and breezy simplicity of old school DIY exposure.
Rab-Eye wrote:
I assume that if you do, you always move your focus point to your subject, and if not, you lock focus and recompose. Simple. My problem is that I don’t do either one consistently. I guess I should make up my mind and stick to one or the other. But for now, given that I switch back and forth, I think it makes the most sense not to lock them together. I’m not looking for some magic answer, but I’m curious—does anyone have an argument for linking them?
Sorry for a rather dumb question.
I assume that if you do, you always move your focu... (
show quote)
Please ... do tell us your own argument for linking them. You say that SOMETIMES you link them. What is YOUR reasoning for it in situations where you choose to link them ?
User ID wrote:
I have this vague notion that you have just explained why automation assisted exposure can get tedious and distracting compared to the light and breezy simplicity of old school DIY exposure.
Well stated !
Oh - the tyranny of our pursuit of the latest and greatest…
D750, usually choose the smallest spot, usually in the middle, focus and re-compose. (Hate the mode where bright lights everywhere, as though it is going to average all the distances and choose what it thinks is a good average focus point.) For action, once chose follow-focus and it actually worked very well, as the cross country runners ran from the left side of the frame to the right.
For individual subjects, I position a single point focus based and composition. The exposure compensation dial takes over from there.
---
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.