eos m10 vs eos m100

Ben Herrmann wrote:

...I seemingly had more fun with the M10 (which I've sold) as compared to the M100. And why? Mainly due to the metering scenario. With the M100, even though you select evaluative metering, the AF box still behaves as if you had spot metering selected. Rather than just meter the entire scene, the metering tends to be influenced right where you place the AF box - which drives me batty. Sure, I shoot in RAW mode so I can adjust levers to bring up or tone down hi-lights and/or shadows - but evaluative metering should be able to evaluate the entire scene - not the area by the AF point.

The previous M10 wasn't as picky in this regard. All of the newer EOS M models have this issue. With other brand cameras there are options (some of them at least) where you have the choice of choosing where the evaluative metering will take place - whether of the entire scene, or where the AF points are. Not so with the M.

So I have to say that I've had more fun with the M10 and it's capable of generating some superb IQ levels. But I'm also enjoying the use of my M100 - just not the metering aspect of using it.

With every Canon digital ILC I've owned (300D, 20D, 50D, 7D, 7DII, M, M6) evaluative metering has behaved this way. If an AF mode using single points is selected, the metering is biased towards the selected AF point (though not as much as spot metering). If I want the metering to take more account of the whole scene, I switch to center-weighted average metering mode. Is this not a possibility on the M100? On my M6, I have four metering options: evaluative, partial, spot, and center-weighted average. The difference between partial and spot is the size of the area in the center used for metering (spot uses a smaller circle in the center). Another way to stop the metering being biased towards the AF point is to switch to MF and lock the metering, then switch back. In any case, I find that the metering behavior of biasing towards the AF point is very useful in most cases. I wouldn't want Canon to change that. If you don't like that, just use center-weighted average metering (if it's available).