Reading mode: Light Dark

Rebel DSLR Series Spot Metering - My Soapbox

Go to last post
macroguy

macroguy

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
346
Reaction score
23
Location
Florence, US
Hi,

I rarely get on my soapbox- but I feel the need to because of the spot metering subject of the Canon Rebel DSLR series.

Canon should be ashamed for not putting true spot metering on the Rebel XTs'. It is inexusable, in my opinion. I love my XT- but I hate the lack of spot metering. I had "assumed" when I had bought it that it had true spot metering. My first digital camera that I purchased in 1998- an Olympus D-600L SLR (then $999 1.3 MP) had true spot metering (and a 1/10000 shutter speed). True spot metering has been on ALL other digital cameras that I had bought before switching to a DSLR. I was ASTOUNDED that it wasn't a feature on the Rebel XT and that I would have to "upgrade" to the 20D to get spot metering. What?! I paid almost $1000 (at the time) for a state of the art Rebel XT- and it didn't have spot metering? I reread the reviews on the camera again- and sure enough- it was listed as a Con or Negative on many reviews. Ugh. Next, I thought, hopefully the 400XTi was going to have spot metering- Canon was going to change their ways. Nope- didn't happen. It is STILL listed in the reviews as a Con or Negative. Shame on Canon.

My favorite camera of all time- the Olympus C-2100 had the multi point spot metering- meaning that I could point at various parts of scene and meter off specific points and the camera would create the average. This is a feature that one person on another thread mentioned had been on a film version of his Canon SLR. He too was disappointed that Canon had removed this feature from most of their DSLRs.

Again, I love my XT- but again- shame on Canon for not implementing true spot metering in their "lower" end of their DSLRs. Canon users deserve better. There is much to recommend Canon DSLRs- CMOS sensor, outstanding selection of lenses, etc. But marketing isn't one of them- and the choice to not include what has become an almost essential and basic feature in almost all digital cameras- seems to me to be a marketing decision. Instead of making excuses for them- we need to do like the DPReview on this site has done- continue to raise the issue as a CON or NEGATIVE against the Rebel series of DSLRs until Canon includes it as a feature.

I enjoy my Rebel DSLR, but I'm extremely annoyed with Canon over this issue.

--
Canon, Olympus, Minolta, Panasonic, and Casio User
http://www.pbase.com/dws02432/
Life is Beautiful- so take a picture of it :)
 
I would like to hear some examples of where spot metering is so critical, that you just cannot get the shot with partial metering and/or the histogram. Now, in the days of shooting slide film, yes, it was much more important, as it helped you use a zone system to determine exposure and dynamic range of the scene. Also, a 9% spot (partial) is availible and works quite nicely for determining exposure in difficult situations. It is very rare indeed where I have a subject that occupies only 1-3% of a scene or where the only neutral tone in a scene is 1-3%.

Yes, spot metering would be a nice feature to have, but hardly a deal breaker for me. For my money, I would rather see a feature like "constant ev", where I can take a meter reading once and then switch between Av, Tv, Auto, or whatever, and have the camera maintain the ev that I set. Yes, I know that's called manual mode, but once you add iso into the mix, it becomes cumbersome to juggle all the settings quickly.
Just my 0.02.
--
Daniel
http://www.pbase.com/dvogel11
Tips http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
FAQ at http://www.marius.org/fom-serve/cache/3.html
 
For every person who complains on this forum about the lack of spot metering, there are 10 who will say not only that they don't need it, but YOU don't need it either (you gotta wonder why it's on pro Canon cameras if it's so unnecessary). I'd say that Canon marketing did their research, and picked a good was to differentiate their entry-level DSLR from their prosumer models.
 
You should have read the specifications. It would clearly show this:

Metering Modes

Max. aperture TTL metering with 35-zone SPC
(1) Evaluative metering (linked to all AF points)
(2) Partial metering (approx. 9% at center of viewfinder)
(3) Center-weighted average metering

Shame on you for not knowing what you are buying. :)
 
Hi Hellashot,

I always appreciate your posts- you are always to the point. :)

I agree- shame on me. :) I had even read the review on this site that pointed out the lack of true spot metering as a negative against the Rebels. Oops- love makes you blind. :)

I love the DRebels- I don't love the lack of the spot metering. Canon put true spot metering on the 30D after people complained it wasn't on the 20Ds. I'm hoping the same will happen with the next generation Rebel, or they will apply a firmware update (if possible) to current Rebels to allow for 3% spot metering.

Thanks again,
Hellashot said:
You should have read the specifications. It would clearly show this:

Metering Modes

Max. aperture TTL metering with 35-zone SPC
(1) Evaluative metering (linked to all AF points)
(2) Partial metering (approx. 9% at center of viewfinder)
(3) Center-weighted average metering

Shame on you for not knowing what you are buying. :)
Click to expand...
--
Canon, Olympus, Minolta, Panasonic, and Casio User
http://www.pbase.com/dws02432/
Life is Beautiful- so take a picture of it :)
 
macroguy said:
I love the DRebels- I don't love the lack of the spot metering.
Canon put true spot metering on the 30D after people complained it
wasn't on the 20Ds. I'm hoping the same will happen with the next
generation Rebel, or they will apply a firmware update (if
possible) to current Rebels to allow for 3% spot metering.
Click to expand...
It's 3.5% on the 30D, BTW. The Nikon spots are approx. 2.5%, does that make them better than the Canon 30D's 3.5% spot...and why is the 9% partial metering of the 400D too big?

The consensus in your 30D forum posting on this seems to be that either spot metering is not that important in the digital world or 9% is sufficient for the overwhelming majority of situations.
 
I believe spot metering would be tied to a physical feature of the exposure sensor - that there is a zone of the sensor which is small enough to count as "spot". I doubt they can tweak the firmware to only use part of the center zone used for partial to instead be spot.
--
http://www.linelight.org/
 
my own soapbox:

The Rebel's do have spot metering, it's called Partial. Canon has nothing to be ashamed of.

Every maker's "Spot meter" is a different size, ranging from 1% to 12% of the viewfinder. The DRebel's is 9-10% of the central area. There is no information readily available about the size of the spot meter of the D-600L or C-2100, other than it is within the central focus brackets. I would guess it's not significantly different than the DRebel's.

The D-600L is not an SLR, and had 1/10,000 shutter speed because it doesn't have a mechanical shutter or mirror. Not so easy to execute in a true SLR, pro- or consumer-level. Do you miss 1/10,000 shutter speed? Did you ever use it? It is only 1 1/3 stop different than 1/4000.
 
Bambi Brown said:
...and why is
the 9% partial metering of the 400D too big?
Click to expand...
If the metering pattern doesn't fit within the object off of which you are metering. then it's too big. That applies whether it is 9%, 3%, 2.5%, or 1%. I run into this frequently when using a wide-angle lens for landscapes in which there is a person of interest to be photographed. If the person is wearing light clothing, I will meter off the clothes to ensure that I expose as far "to the right" as possible. But it happens when using a telephoto lens too, if the object is relatively small. From experience, I'd say that 3% or smaller would cover the vast majority of the scenes I photograph. 9% only covers about 2/3.
Bambi Brown said:
The consensus in your 30D forum posting on this seems to be that
either spot metering is not that important in the digital world
Click to expand...
Well, that shows you why following the consensus opinion is a bad way of making decisions. Because the advantages of exposing as far to the right as possible can be so dramatic with digital, I'd say that spot metering is even more important for digital.
Bambi Brown said:
... or
9% is sufficient for the overwhelming majority of situations.
Click to expand...
That's like saying a 35mm prime is sufficient for the overwhelming majority of situations. It totally depends on what and how you shoot.
 
Bambi Brown said:
macroguy said:
I love the DRebels- I don't love the lack of the spot metering.
Canon put true spot metering on the 30D after people complained it
wasn't on the 20Ds. I'm hoping the same will happen with the next
generation Rebel, or they will apply a firmware update (if
possible) to current Rebels to allow for 3% spot metering.
Click to expand...
It's 3.5% on the 30D, BTW. The Nikon spots are approx. 2.5%, does
that make them better than the Canon 30D's 3.5% spot...and why is
the 9% partial metering of the 400D too big?

The consensus in your 30D forum posting on this seems to be that
either spot metering is not that important in the digital world or
9% is sufficient for the overwhelming majority of situations.
Click to expand...
 
"If the person is wearing light clothing, I will meter off the clothes to ensure that I expose as far "to the right" as possible"

Wouldn't exposing for the light clothing actually result in exposing farther to the left?
 
On a 15mm x 22.5mm sensor, 9% is a circle of 6.2mm diameter. 3.5% is 3.9mm diameter circle. So 9% partial is just 59% wider than 3.5% spot, not 157%.
 
Not if I use the correct amount of exposure compensation.
SHudson said:
...Wouldn't exposing for the light clothing actually result in
exposing farther to the left?
Click to expand...
 
But what matters more, the diameter or the area? Neither, really. What matters is how well the spot fits into the area you are metering. I think most people who have used a 1-degree spot meter know that it works well for the vast majority of cases, and know that 9% is adequate for far fewer scenes, and thus conclude that smaller is better.
Lemming51 said:
On a 15mm x 22.5mm sensor, 9% is a circle of 6.2mm diameter. 3.5%
is 3.9mm diameter circle. So 9% partial is just 59% wider than
3.5% spot, not 157%.
Click to expand...
 
The very same vast international marketing juggernaut that put spot metering in my Powershot S50 but decided that the Rebel series would be intentionally sabotaged with no spot metering to help people move up to the 30D.
--
Nimnar
 
macroguy said:
My favorite camera of all time- the Olympus C-2100 had the multi
point spot metering- meaning that I could point at various parts of
scene and meter off specific points and the camera would create the
average. This is a feature that one person on another thread
mentioned had been on a film version of his Canon SLR. He too was
disappointed that Canon had removed this feature from most of their
DSLRs.
Click to expand...
This is not a fair comparison. Most Non-SLR digital cameras, including the C-2100 you love so much, don't use dedicated sensors for metering. They use the green channel of the main image sensor, which is less reliable, and much slower. The one advantage is that you can take a meter reading from any spot on the image sensor. Because an SLR uses dedicated, high-speed sensors, it can calculate the exposure in a mere fraction of the time that it takes for a standard digicam, and with higher accuracy. The downsides are that each sensor zone added to the camera increases the cost to manufacture, and the areas you can sample from are fixed. The post you mention may have been making reference to a metering mode on the EOS-1V (Canon's top-of-the-line EOS model) which links a 2.4% spot to the selected focus point.

A little research will show you that the Digital Rebel metering system was inherited directly from the Rebel line of film cameras. They have the same 9% partial metering mode and no "spot" metering. For "spot" metering you have to step up to the higher-end film cameras as well. But then, you have to ask yourself, where is this magic threshold at which it becomes spot metering? 5%? 3%? 2%? The concept is the same: take a small area in the middle of the frame and average the exposure for that area while ignoring everything else. If they had decided to call it "spot" instead of "partial" would we even be having this discussion? Then they could just call the 20D version "spot-plus" or something.

--
Jordan
 
nimnar said:
The very same vast international marketing juggernaut that put spot
metering in my Powershot S50 but decided that the Rebel series
would be intentionally sabotaged with no spot metering to help
people move up to the 30D.
--
Nimnar
Click to expand...
What was the reasoning for have only 9% partial metering on the 20D when that was released?
 
In previous threads I have stated that I think spot-metering is a serious omission on the Rebels. Just a simple question for anyone who might know: Of all the DSLRs in current production, aside from the XT/XTi, which do not have spot-metering? Just curious.
Jack
 
Small enough for there to be a difference when using it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top