Thom's remark on limits of MM and luminosity

[Gunzorro]

Jason -- I'm sorry for any misunderstanding the photos might be causing. These are not examples of proper exposure, but a comparison of the two single center AF points and to what degee they affect exposure. The first shot of each was aimed directly on the center palm with its brightly lit left side and slightly shadowed right side. The second shot of each set, the central AF point was completely in the dark green cypress tree.

The exp compensation is simply incidental and what I was using for general overexposure by the D7000 -- these sets were in the middle of more shots/settings.

Regardless, the point here is the greater influence of the center point on the Canon 1Ds, which I don't care for. I much prefer the greater immunity of the Nikon -- I don't want a tiny speck of AF to influence the overall scene's exposure. That's not bad news about Nikon at all, and it's not related to the overall topic of over-exposure in MM mode. I'm just pointing out one example from my experience related to someone's mentioning they thought the opposite -- that the AF point had excessive effect on the overall exposure.

I hope that is more clear.

 

[illdefined_OLD]

The possibility might exist since only a few people are making an awful big stink about something a lot more people say isn't a problem. What would you think? Would you think that only these three or four people know what a properly exposed photo is and that hundreds of others are simply grunts who don't know what they are seeing with their own eyes. I'm just saying....

review sites are piling up mentioning the issue, and even Thom Hogan recognizes and frowns upon the 16.3 EV cap set by Matrix-Metering in P mode (and suggests useful ways around it). it is not just a handful of posters.

you may be a "serious" Nikon shooter and never use P mode and hence never see the problem, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. expecting everybody to be a seasoned Nikon expert at this level camera isn't just shortsighted, it's downright arrogant.

 

[Swedish Hambern]

I've also noted the incidental overexposure. I've also compared AF-S to AF-A and AF-C modes. Sometimes one is better (less dependent on the focus point) and sometimes the other. First I thought maybe using AF-A would solve this, but I thought wrong.

The worst problem is that it is so inconsistent. I can do a meter reading on an object, take a photo and do the same thing over again and get at totally different exposure. This makes it really hard to "learn it's behaviour and compensate" bacause it can do realy strange things.

Though it seems to nail the flash photos perfectly. I haven't used a camera that exposes so well with flash if you set it to matrix mode. Really impressive.

 

[Gunzorro]

Let's say 80% are not experiencing any MM problems at all! That's awesome.

But let's say 20% are. That's a bummer for the 20%, not so much for the 80%.

Even if the numbers are 95/5, it is still of concern to the 5%, and should be at least a curiosity to the other 95% -- if it is legit, why are they having this problem?

(The MM issue is very insignificant compared to the focusing/back-focus issues. These's no way to correct for OOF in regular PP!)

 

[binary_eye]

I like using DSLR cameras for the complete control it offers.

Yet you just wrote that you can't be bothered to change settings for different shooting situations. That seems a bit contradictory.

Aside from personal shooting, I mainly shoot events, sports, and studio. All three require different settings. As a photographer being paid to do such things, it's my job to know which settings are best for the given situation and to use them. If I were to use studio settings to shoot a football game, "I didn't feel like changing the settings" would be a poor excuse for a botched shoot.

Also DSLR's offer a much larger sensor than your P&S -- about 4X if you are using a full frame sensor.

The only P&S I own is a Canon SD400. It has a crop factor of about 6x. Most compacts these days use a 1/2.3" sensor which translates to crop factor of about 5.5x. The "large sensor" compacts such as the P7000, LX5, S95, etc., have a crop factor of about 4.7x.

 

[JasonED]

Jason -- I'm sorry for any misunderstanding the photos might be causing. These are not examples of proper exposure, but a comparison of the two single center AF points and to what degee they affect exposure. The first shot of each was aimed directly on the center palm with its brightly lit left side and slightly shadowed right side. The second shot of each set, the central AF point was completely in the dark green cypress tree.

The exp compensation is simply incidental and what I was using for general overexposure by the D7000 -- these sets were in the middle of more shots/settings.

Regardless, the point here is the greater influence of the center point on the Canon 1Ds, which I don't care for. I much prefer the greater immunity of the Nikon -- I don't want a tiny speck of AF to influence the overall scene's exposure. That's not bad news about Nikon at all, and it's not related to the overall topic of over-exposure in MM mode. I'm just pointing out one example from my experience related to someone's mentioning they thought the opposite -- that the AF point had excessive effect on the overall exposure.

I hope that is more clear.

Thanks for the explanation but part of my point remains.

The two Nikon shots are differently composed. The second one includes an extra bright area in the right hand side. The very nature of Matrix Metering means it could have used a totally different 'scene' in its algorithms to arrive at the end exposure. The fact that the end exposure changed only slightly can't be used as evidence for the use of the focus spot - far too many other variables involved.

In any case it does seem that the focus point dependence has been lessened in the D7000 from cameras like the D80 which is good.
--
The sky is blue and there is nothing we can do..
My Escape:
http://itunes.apple.com/nz/app/myescape/id348079652
?mt=8

 

[binary_eye]

The D70s matrix meter is really really good.

The irony, here, is that most felt the D70 was too prone to protecting highlights and underexposed in matrix. Same with the D200, to a lesser degree. I've used the D70 and still use the D200 and my experience agrees.

 

[Gunzorro]

Thanks Steve! I'll be dropping it off soon, after the holidays. I've got a couple older Nikon lenses that need adjustment too, so it will be a family field day.

 

[Gunzorro]

Ha-ha! Touche!

I do have more photos than the wooden fence in my gallery.

Yes, sweet horse.

 

[Swedish Hambern]

I think I will send it to Nikon to get it checked. I've spoken to a technician at Nikon who said that they can look into it as they also correct the focusing (backfocus issue). But I'm starting to think that this inconsistent unpredictable matrix metering is a Nikon "feature" from the D80 and forth.

And if that's the case I might change camp. I got into the Nikon camp because I loved the metering system on the D70 compared to Canons. For everyday use it was perfect, in tough situations I used spot metering.

But now when they made the matrix system almost useless (because of it's inconsistency) I now have to use the spot metering or centerweight metering instead, and that's a really huge step backwards in terms of photography technology.

But I will let them check it. If it's still the same after I will probably go Pentax or Canon.

 

[Gunzorro]

Ott -- Fine. Then why to you keep responding, twisting what I say, and antagonizing?

 

[Steve Bingham]

Why stick with Program Mode? Aperature priority and/or shutter priority can be so much MORE useful.

I think I will send it to Nikon to get it checked. I've spoken to a technician at Nikon who said that they can look into it as they also correct the focusing (backfocus issue). But I'm starting to think that this inconsistent unpredictable matrix metering is a Nikon "feature" from the D80 and forth.

And if that's the case I might change camp. I got into the Nikon camp because I loved the metering system on the D70 compared to Canons. For everyday use it was perfect, in tough situations I used spot metering.

But now when they made the matrix system almost useless (because of it's inconsistency) I now have to use the spot metering or centerweight metering instead, and that's a really huge step backwards in terms of photography technology.

But I will let them check it. If it's still the same after I will probably go Pentax or Canon.

--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com

 

[Gunzorro]

Backward -- Hilarious!

 

[Swedish Hambern]

Yes... It was a pretty harsh debate with the underexposure tendency of D70. It was designed to preserv highlights and in tough situations that meant underexposure. In those, rare occations, I used spot metering. As I remembered those that prefered brighter images ended up setting the EC to +0.3 and were totally happy with the result allmost all the time.

Now a .3 difference seems like a total luxury as D7000 often misses with an entire stop. The point is. The D70 matrix mode was consistent and could be trusted. The D7000 matrix mode is not. And that's the main problem.

 

[illdefined_OLD]

I think I will send it to Nikon to get it checked. I've spoken to a technician at Nikon who said that they can look into it as they also correct the focusing (backfocus issue). But I'm starting to think that this inconsistent unpredictable matrix metering is a Nikon "feature" from the D80 and forth.

And if that's the case I might change camp. I got into the Nikon camp because I loved the metering system on the D70 compared to Canons. For everyday use it was perfect, in tough situations I used spot metering.

But now when they made the matrix system almost useless (because of it's inconsistency) I now have to use the spot metering or centerweight metering instead, and that's a really huge step backwards in terms of photography technology.

But I will let them check it. If it's still the same after I will probably go Pentax or Canon.

before you do all that, try using Matrix-Metering outside of P mode, try A or S. apparently, the Nikon imposed 16.3 EV ceiling only exists for P mode (manual page 298), which bright scenes often surpass.

 

[Gunzorro]

Yes, illdefined, all the reviewers, and the owners, with a metering objection are full of it, and detracting from the glory. (Probably in the pay of Sony!)

The extensive denial is what makes it an issue, as you've noticed. Otherwise it's a firmware patch, end of story.

 

[JasonED]

The D70s matrix meter is really really good.

The irony, here, is that most felt the D70 was too prone to protecting highlights and underexposed in matrix. Same with the D200, to a lesser degree. I've used the D70 and still use the D200 and my experience agrees.

I would agree with those that think the D70 generally under exposed.

The reality is that I believe we are dealing with 2 distinct ways of shooting - visually 'correct' out of camera exposure versus 'optimal data capture'. I am in the latter camp.

Maybe the camera needs more configuration options for exposure - but then reviewers would probably call the setup 'too complicated'...
--
The sky is blue and there is nothing we can do..
My Escape:
http://itunes.apple.com/nz/app/myescape/id348079652
?mt=8

 

[Gunzorro]

Steve -- I've been shooting the majority of my tests in Aperture mode and RAW. Occasionally I'll shift to Manual. Very rarely S, and so far never P.

I have used Bulb on several twilight shots, but that's really Manual.

Outside of novices using P, perhaps mine has a failure or out of adjustment. Perhaps a few other owners are experiencing the same. I can't speak for anyone else.

 

[binary_eye]

binary -- You know you are being silly for effect.

Actually, I was asking an honest question. You've claimed in multiple posts that the D7000 has a tendency to overexpose with matrix. Yet you do a casual test, and the D7000 shots are better exposed than the 1Ds shots. Basically, I'm asking what you were attempting to accomplish by posting your results.

You've got your rhetoric amp set to "11".

Believe what you want; I'm relatively brand agnostic. For example: I'm envious of Canon's more affordable mid-range telephotos and Pentax's prime lineup, and wish Nikon would go in that direction. I'll recommend non-Nikon compacts to anyone, any time. I also dislike Nikon software with something approaching a passion.

And, ironically, the guitar amp I generally use goes to twelve. Eleven is for sissies.

 

[binary_eye]

I now have to use the spot metering or centerweight metering instead, and that's a really huge step backwards in terms of photography technology.

But is it a step backward in terms of results? Electronic shutters are more recent technology than focal plane shutters but I'd much prefer the latter. Don't assume newer is always better.