Thom's remark on limits of MM and luminosity

Tom -- You sort of have the concept, but to my preference, evaluative metering is, at its best, is like an informed multi-spot metering assessment. Taking light readings from multiple areas or segments, it should be a terrific answer to what the scene is like, from overall brightness, to specifics like back-lighting, subject reflectance, and many other things. Theoretically, it should be far advanced refinement of the Averaging, Center-weighted evolution. And it should be applicable to the majority of shooting situations.

On top of this, supposedly Nikon has introduce a memory bank of comparative scenes, subjects or images, which can be matched (like CSI fingerprint scanning? ;) ) to the information it is capturing.

It seems like a slam dunk for anyone wanting to use a more sophisticated system, and for other brands, it does seem to generally provide those results. With Nikon, there is some fly in the ointment.

Just for the record, I haven't noticed Nikon's metering to be particularly influenced by the AF spot chosen. I tried half-press lock on AF for a bright and dark area of the scene, and both exposues came out the same with single focus point AF. On my Canon 1Ds, the AF selection has a huge influence on the exposure.

Here are two examples from the D7000. The first shot has the AF point on the center palm trunk. The second shot is on the dark green cypress (now in the center). As you can see, very little difference in the exposure.









OTOH, the Canon 1Ds, show the exposure is directly influenced by the choice of single AF point.







 
Stujomo -- I agree. My D1X is excellent, as was my Fuji S5 (I know it's not the D200, but there is some interplay of technology and parts). I have had fine results with Canon and Pentax as well.
So, something changed apparently, around the time of the D3/D300.
 
Matrix Metering (and all Evaluative) is supposed to be a computer assisted metering of advanced sophistication [...] over Center-weighted,
Interesting. Who told you that?
The complaint with the Nikon MM is that it isn't functioning as it should, or as expected, or as Nikon has advertised. I haven't found Canon's or Pentax's to be at fault as the Nikon is.
I think that by now, everybody on this forum has heard you.
It might be a good time to brig your campaign to the new level.
Write a letter to Nikon demanding, they change MM to suit your expectations.
 
Richard -- I expect that I am Nikon's perfect target audience. I shoot the D7000 in MM. I shoot NEF only. And I bought NX2 to PP the NEFs in Nikon's own "soup".

I should be the last with complaints.

But I find the exposures too bright, by 1/2 to 1 full stop in most outdoor sunlight medium to high contrast situations. That means a rather tedious PP of individual images (Nikon does need a better multiple image selection and correction process, ala Canon's DPP).

I'm just lazy! :) I know I shouldn't need to go through so many steps to make the images look "right" for my eye. And I'm not trying to do anything unusual, if anyone has seen my postings.

(I have used CSM b5 to globally reduce exposure by -3/6. But now it seems my SB-700 flash shots are getting under -exposed by this amount! ;) I don't really want to fiddle faddle with all the hidden settings every time my usage changes. Help me, Obi-Nikon-Kenobi, you're my only hope!)
 
It seems like a slam dunk for anyone wanting to use a more sophisticated system, and for other brands, it does seem to generally provide those results. With Nikon, there is some fly in the ointment.

Here are two examples from the D7000. The first shot has the AF point on the center palm trunk. The second shot is on the dark green cypress (now in the center). As you can see, very little difference in the exposure.

OTOH, the Canon 1Ds, show the exposure is directly influenced by the choice of single AF point.
So you would prefer it if the camera overexposes when the AF point is over a dark area? This seems the polar opposite of what you've been suggesting.
 
Well, I was answering a question about "why not just use center/spot". I have zero experience using MM on the D7000. My D7000 is too new and I haven't used MM on it yet. I don't use MM often. I will say that I've never seen a camera that had "knock out accurate MM". There always has been (for me) just too many situations that MM guessed wrong.

And yes, I actually do a lot of manual focus. I do quite a bit of macro work and manual focus is FAR FAR better in macro than AF. And yes, I still shot and develop my own film in my darkroom. Only for "personal projects", clients haven't wanted film in a LONG time. Oh darn...... now I really do sound like an "old guy"!!!!!
nobody is debating what you're saying, but its 2010, and just like 39 points of Auto-Focus that can track a moving subject, people do expect this camera to guess, and apparently guess better .

do you always manually focus and develop your own film? some used to say what Ansel Adams did was cheating, because he didn't PAINT the scene!
--
Tom Ferguson
http://www.ferguson-photo-design.com
 
Totally agree. I'm starting to think that we all should adress the problem to Nikon and not only complain here. I've mailed Nikon here in Sweden and said that if they don't fix this issue i might go to Pentax (they really have a lot going for them at the moment).
 
What do you mean? The matrix metering mode is allmost useless, and you don't see that as a problem? How can that NOT be a problem? You really should ano 2010 be able to hand over your camera to your mother in law and expect decent pictures without having to teach her how to use this "not magical" instrument.

An expensive camera (the D7000 is pretty expensive) really should be able to take photos in daylight without having to resort to workarounds. If not, it's released too early.

And if this is the new Nikon standard metering. Bye then... I'm off to the Pentax forum.
DSLR cameras are not "magical" instruments, just tools to be used by knowledgeable operators. You have to be smarter than the tool you're using to get the results you want.

I'm old too. :-)

Jim
 
Thanks ott. Point taken.
You are welcome.
Can I offer a recap of your campaign so far?

1. You are not a P&Ser

2. You are a proud owner of Canon 1Ds and 5D, Nikon D1 and possibly many other fine cameras and lenses
3. You are not new to photography nor optics
4. You bought a D7000
5. You forgot to read the manual
6. D7000 has ruined your life
7. You complained about all the issues ad nausea

8. The only argument you are offering, is that your other fine cameras do everything differently, and you certainly expected this one to follow

9. It seems you have now discovered, that your D7000 is not only over-exposing, but also under-exposing

Seriously: what is your point?
 
Totally agree. I'm starting to think that we all should adress the problem to Nikon and not only complain here.
Unbelievable: I just suggested same to poster Zorro! Maybe you should pool your resources? You are going to have greater leverage, if you did.
I've mailed Nikon here in Sweden and said that if they don't fix this issue i might go to Pentax
Please don't do it. Please!
 
Gunzorro,

On the D300 and now on the D7000 I've found that ADL (set to High on the D7000) works well to prevent that bright sun problem, even in raw (all it does in raw is drop the exposure 1/2-1 stop). I've just started with the camera, so may find other problems. However using ADL is better than biasing the meter system and affecting other modes, as you've noted.

Richard Southworth
 
Jim -- I'm not criticising your desire to use Center-weighted metering.

The complaint with the Nikon MM is that it isn't functioning as it should, or as expected, or as Nikon has advertised. I haven't found Canon's or Pentax's to be at fault as the Nikon is.
Most people seem to think it is working spectacularly. Lots of posts in this forum besides yours. If you aren't getting the results you want perhaps you are doing something wrong. Or perhaps you should have done some research first and bought a Canon instead.
 
Both of your examples for the D7000 look better exposed to me than the two Canon examples. And the D7000 is "broken"? Both Canon examples are significantly overexposing the bright areas.

I've only had a few days with the D7000 and I would agree that it favors exposing for a subject rather than the brightest point. I would agree with Nikon's decision on this since most people who mess up this kind of shot do it this way. A knowledgable photographer can compensate.

Someone unhappy with this can return or sell their camera. I just don't see a reason for all the venom in this forum.
 
... the more they stay the same. There is nothing new under the sun, and it's another year, another camera, and it's the same with some people's unrealistic expectations of what the matrix meter can do.

If the camera does all the thinking, is what you are doing really art?

--
http://1000wordpics.blogspot.com
 
Regardless whether it is a D300 or a D7000, Nikon has always pointed out that matrix metering can be undependable in given situations, and they have always recommended other metering modes or compensation in those cases. Given that a huge number of people are getting excellent exposure in Matrix mode with the D7000, is it possible the complaints are from people who are intentionally trying to make the system fail by using Matrix in situations where even the manual says don't go there? I have checked many D7000 photos on flickr where matrix mode was used, sometimes with compensation, sometimes without. They look good to me. What are these people doing different? I think they are simply using the camera like any other Nikon, adjust when it's called for, and leave it alone when it isn't.
 
... the more they stay the same. There is nothing new under the sun, and it's another year, another camera, and it's the same with some people's unrealistic expectations of what the matrix meter can do.

If the camera does all the thinking, is what you are doing really art?

--
http://1000wordpics.blogspot.com
what's different, and what people are reacting to, is that reviews on both DPReview and CameraLabs both expressly commented on the metering behavior for this particular model

edit: ....followed by personal experiences with the same issue
 
If Nikon produces a firmware update to fix the "over exposure" issue, I will not be updating my D7000. My D700 does not seems to overexposed, so far the histogram sits where I expect it to be - in the middle of the scale with no blown highlights except very small specular spots, which is expected. The red channel does looks very close to the right but still not touching the right. This is the same for all three metering modes.

In contrast, my D700 seems to over expose by 1/3 to 1/2 stop. Normally, when it happened in certain lighting conditions, I just dial in a little compensation.

Lighthog
 
Why not just shoot using center weighted metering?

The answer to your question is in the picture - just look at all the blown highlights, at least from my monitor.

Lighthog
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top