Multi-spot exposure meter on camera challenge

[138S]

I'm thinking the Nikon FA has matrix metering does that count?

FA was first Matrix metering camera in the world.

Not only this: "The FA has a closed-loop exposure system. This means that while displaying the exposure any time the meter is on, the FA measures the actual exposure after the lens stops down to its taking aperture, just an instant before the actual exposure. This way the FA corrects for any errors in the lens' diaphragm mechanism, so I get exposures more consistent from lens to lens than on newer cameras. Some lenses have diaphragms which are calibrated so that they may over or under expose a little, but on an FA, they all expose perfectly."

(Ken Rockwell)

 

[superflash]

138S:
the matrix as the evaluation systems, multiarea, honeycomb, multi segments etc ... are suitable to determine the best possible optimal exposure that is needed to shoot for each scene, in any light condition, they are very useful in situations where there isn't time to think and you need to take the snapshot home but they don't allow you to preview the shot you have in mind, they perform a different function from the multispot which instead is only an informative and objective system that leaves you free to choice and responsibility of the result to the photographer.

 

[superflash]

BradS:
no Nikon FA doesn't count because its matrix has a different logic, in some ways opposite to the multi spot, as I shown in my previous message.
CLC is more close to matrix (simplified and primitive).

 

[superflash]

M-88.
It is true, I fully agree with you, the OM 3/4 system is more immediate, intuitive and faster: you have everything in front of your eyes without having to take your eyes off the viewfinder. In 1985 the Minolta back 90 back was too forward and too complex (and slow) to use.

If anyone wants to try it there is one here:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Minolta-Pr...859628?hash=item2d060a316c:g:pN0AAOSwvxBeZUB2

 

[BradS]

Nikon is better.

 

[138S]

138S:
the matrix as the evaluation systems, multiarea, honeycomb, multi segments etc ... are suitable to determine the best possible optimal exposure that is needed to shoot for each scene, in any light condition, they are very useful in situations where there isn't time to think and you need to take the snapshot home but they don't allow you to preview the shot you have in mind, they perform a different function from the multispot which instead is only an informative and objective system that leaves you free to choice and responsibility of the result to the photographer.

Ok, but it's also the case of multi-spot: you don't know much what you obtain.

If wanting to know well what you are to get then there is a single way: spot metering.

With Spot mode you know the exact under/over exposure of each critical area: You may balance well your exposure knowing exactly what you sacrifice and where, and if having to use a graded ND for Velvia it tells the grade. in some cases incident metering is also very good, but not always.

 

[superflash]

138S: "If wanting to know well what you are to get then there is a single way: spot metering"

In fact, I also use the one with an external spot. The discussion instead concerns multi-spots.
I do the multi-spot myself with pen and paper starting from various single spot readings: I draw a horizontal graduated line on a sheet and place all the readings in EV, then I decide which area I want to reproduce in the medium tone (to have there the maximum detail) and I put this reading at 0, the others I get for difference with precision of 1/10 of EV; then I simulate the possible results with various exposures based on the film I use ... and in the meantime the light conditions have changed so I am forced to do it all over again!

 

[koraks]

Ok, but it's also the case of multi-spot: you don't know much what you obtain.

If wanting to know well what you are to get then there is a single way: spot metering.

Multi-spot is just several spot measurements together in one plot. Hence, it's in no way inferior to spot; in fact, it tells you more in one glance. Of course you still have to do the individual measurements. In that sense it's not different from taking several individual spot measuremenrs one after the other; there's just a little memory added to it.

 

[superflash]

koraks: " it tells you more in one glance "

Here is the point:
while with the single spot you have to make the measurements and then calculate separately the differences in the brightness values to understand the distribution of the contrast of the scene, with the multi-spot all this can be done faster, without take your eyes off the viewfinder. Everything I do and that I described in my previous message, the muti-spot helps to do it better, more comfortably by showing it in front of your eyes and with additional parameters according to your needs. Obviously this system is suitable for static shots.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Sirius Glass:
F100?
How do you activate the multi-spot on the F100?
What page is explained in the manual?
https://www.cameramanuals.org/nikon_pdf/nikon_f100.pdf

pp 44-46

 

[138S]

138S: "If wanting to know well what you are to get then there is a single way: spot metering"

In fact, I also use the one with an external spot. The discussion instead concerns multi-spots.
I do the multi-spot myself with pen and paper starting from various single spot readings: I draw a horizontal graduated line on a sheet and place all the readings in EV, then I decide which area I want to reproduce in the medium tone (to have there the maximum detail) and I put this reading at 0, the others I get for difference with precision of 1/10 of EV; then I simulate the possible results with various exposures based on the film I use ... and in the meantime the light conditions have changed so I am forced to do it all over again!

Expose for the shadows and develop for the lights !!!

No way based of averaged spots will give you total control on what you do.

In LF, as we can make a custom development for each individual BW sheet, we ensure the right exposure for the detail we want in the shadows and later we meter highlights to know if we have to underdevelop to not get too high densities there, this is the way we nail exposure for each sheet, just spot metering two spots, one to determine exposure and the other to determine development.

With rolls we cannot make an individual development for each frame, so procedure for negative film is slightly different:

1) Determine exposure for shadows, say we place our shadows at -1.

2) Check mids and highlights to know how much they are overexposed... and to find if we should sacrifice more quality in the shadows to not have too high densities.


With slides in rolls, also we cannot make an individual development for each frame, so procedure for slide film is slightly different, for example:

1) Determine exposure for highlights, usually we don't want toasted highlights in the slides, say we place our highlights at -1.5.

2) Check mids and sahdows to know if we need a graded ND or if we may want to consider to have a loss in the highlights to have mids in the right place.


This is the kind of custom "multi-spot" that's works, you don't average spots, you check one or two spots and you quickly balance your exposure in an smart way. This is faster than trying to guess what the multi-spot calculation is doing and adjusting with the compensation dial.

Many times, for portraits, you take just one spot reading in the right place, that's all. If you take an additional second reading this is not to meter but to adjust illumination, key vs fill, to get what you want.

My preference, multi-spot... yes !!!

...but I decide what spots and how I balance, to me it's the faster way that allows total control, but YMMV.

I'm a relative newcomer to LF, but metering for LF refined the way I presently meter.

A good exercise is using Sunny 16 for a while, it builds intuition and self-confidence in the photographer.

Ansel Adams metered the "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico" by smelling the moon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonrise,_Hernandez,_New_Mexico

See how many decades later still he was remembering all metering details...

 

[Les Sarile]

Les Sarile:
I fully agree with your opinion: first of all it is important to have full control of the development for the negatives while for slides it is necessary to analize well how the laboratory develops them.
I have a question for you: when you take measures with OM3/4, is it possible put all (up to 8) on the measuring scale at bottom of wievfinder or every time meter read a value appears only the first value and the average value?

Just tried it on my OM-3 and OM-4T. On the 3, I can only get 7 spots while on the 4 I can get 8. All on the scale at the bottom.

I have used the Hilight and Shadow modes, very convenient and quick too.

 

[wiltw]

Les Sarile:
I fully agree with your opinion: first of all it is important to have full control of the development for the negatives while for slides it is necessary to analize well how the laboratory develops them.
I have a question for you: when you take measures with OM3/4, is it possible put all (up to 8) on the measuring scale at bottom of wievfinder or every time meter read a value appears only the first value and the average value?

Each time you take a reading with OM-4 spot, a dot appears along the exposure scale...but you cannot see multiple dots for 'same exposure' measured multiple times. But you could have up to 8 dots along the scale.

 

[wiltw]

#5 is inactive when a spot or multi-spot reading has been taken.
I always find multispot inconvenient because I have to pick spots that represent the average. If I want to give emphasis to a tone I might click twice on that tone. But I am not giving the correct exposure. Spot-shadow and spot-highlight are useful but not configurable...

And don’t forget to lock or your reading is cleared with the shutter release

the setting can be set into memory, so it carries over across multiple shots

 

[Bill Burk]

the setting can be set into memory, so it carries over across multiple shots

Right and you can use manual mode with spots.

 

[koraks]

...but I decide what spots and how I balance, to me it's the faster way that allows total control, but YMMV.

That's exactly what we're talking about and what the t90's multi spot feature helps you to do. It's not so much about the camera deciding an exposure for you, it's the camera helping you along by showing the various measured spots in relation to each other so you can conveniently pick an exposure that places a certain spot exaclty where you want it to be.

Not sure if you already understood it but it seems like you were missing the point that we were trying to make. No offense.

 

[138S]

That's exactly what we're talking about and what the t90's multi spot feature helps you to do. It's not so much about the camera deciding an exposure for you, it's the camera helping you along by showing the various measured spots in relation to each other so you can conveniently pick an exposure that places a certain spot exaclty where you want it to be.

Not sure if you already understood it but it seems like you were missing the point that we were trying to make. No offense.

koraks, what I point is that in a multi-spot metering you are never aware of the effective/real underexposure you have in the shadows, you have to guess many things to adjust a compensation if what the camera does is not exactly what you want.

...so multi-spot only adds confusion if photographer is skilled and knowing what he wants, anyway it serves well those not having the skills to balance well exposure or not wanting to to make the mental effort. Many times multi-spot will deliver good exposure as center-weighted does, given film has latitude.

When the scene is really challenging single mode offering total control is spot mode, IMO, by just checking one spot and presssing E Lock, or cheking two or three spots and adjusting manually. In not challenging scenes any mode will do it well, just (with negative film) add +0.5 ot +1 compensation as a safety belt and you'll never fail.

 

[koraks]

koraks, what I point is that in a multi-spot metering you are never aware of the effective/real underexposure you have in the shadows, you have to guess many things to adjust a compensation if what the camera does is not exactly what you want.

I don't see this. You measure a spot in the shadows, it is displayed in the multi-spot bar, you choose exposure in such a way that the shadow spot ends up where you want it to be (e.g. at -1). Or when shooting slides, the opposite approach for highlights.

It seems you still don't understand what 'multi-spot' means in this context. Several people have explained it by now, but in a final attempt I'll try to clarify once more: I (and others too) am NOT referring to an auto-exposure in which the camera automatically measures several spots and then proposes an exposure based on it without displaying information on which spots were measured and how they relate to each other. I am referring to the functionality as present in e.g. the Canon T90 where the user manually measures several spots, each of these spots are displayed on an exposure bar, and based on that display, the user shifts the exposure upwards or downwards so that the spots end up in the desired place on the exposure scale. It is full control, just like you describe when you talk about manually measuring a few spots, but with the added help of having all of those measurements displayed on a convenient bar so you can see in one glance how they relate to each other.

Do NOT confuse multi-spot functionality with matrix metering. They are NOT the same thing.

 

[superflash]

Sirius Glass:
pag. 44-45 show 3 metering systems, but none of them is multi-spot. The first one, Matrix, is not multi-spot and the third one is single spot.

 

[138S]

Or when shooting slides, the opposite approach for highlights.

Of course... With slides highlights have a lot of priority because blown highlights are nasty.

Anyway, if the scene is challenging and surpassing medium's Dynamic Range, and wanting the shadow detail, then the single way is metering to get the mids and the shadows OK, then with selected exposure you spot meter highlights (tipically sky/clouds) and then you select a graded ND that places the sky in the exposure you want.

With multi-spot and etc it is a mess adusting exposure like in the case I described. You want yo know were you have the shadows and you want to spot meter the sky to determine the G ND.

Do NOT confuse multi-spot functionality with matrix metering. They are NOT the same thing.

I do not confuse it.

Multi-spot functionality makes no miracle: "separate Highlight and Shadow spot readings could be taken. These adjust the camera's metering decisions to ensure extremes of tonal range are not muted and grey in the final exposure."

It has intermedite "intelligence" in adjusting exposure, but you are never aware about what underexposure you have in the shadows or overexposure in the highlights.

My view is that if wanting automation then the F5 makes it way better, and if wanting control then be proficient/fast in the spot mode.

YMMV, but to me those intermediate intelligence systems are only worth if not being proficient with spot meter. To shot fast matrix mode is better, and if having to think in a compensation for the multi-spot then with bare Spot mode you are done faster and having total control.

 

[koraks]

I do not confuse it.

Multi-spot functionality makes no miracle: "separate Highlight and Shadow spot readings could be taken. These adjust the camera's metering decisions to ensure extremes of tonal range are not muted and grey in the final exposure."

It has intermedite "intelligence" in adjusting exposure, but you are never aware about what underexposure you have in the shadows or overexposure in the highlights.

Yes, you are confusing it. In e.g. the T90's multi-spot mode, once you have made the several spot measurements, an average exposure is indeed set as default, which you then manually shift using the up/down buttons to the place you want it. While doing so, the different measurements remain visible in the bar, so you still have full knowledge of where each spot ends up. While there is some automation in calculating a proposed exposure, it does not remove any of the transparency and visibility of the actual measurements and how they relate to the selected (by the camera or the user) exposure and as a photographer, you remain in complete control of the exposure. So the statement 'you are never aware about what underexposure you have in the shadows or overexposure in the highlights' is pertinently NOT true in the case of the T90 multi-spot functionality. In fact, it is in my experience the most transparent way of gathering and presenting exposure measurement information in a camera allowing for complete control and visibility of how the chosen exposure relates to the actual measurements (and not just one measurement, but up to 9 measurements at the same time).

 

[138S]

Yes, you are confusing it. In e.g. the T90's multi-spot mode, once you have made the several spot measurements, an average exposure is indeed set as default, which you then manually shift using the up/down buttons to the place you want it. While doing so, the different measurements remain visible in the bar, so you still have full knowledge of where each spot ends up. While there is some automation in calculating a proposed exposure, it does not remove any of the transparency and visibility of the actual measurements and how they relate to the selected (by the camera or the user) exposure and as a photographer, you remain in complete control of the exposure. So the statement 'you are never aware about what underexposure you have in the shadows or overexposure in the highlights' is pertinently NOT true in the case of the T90 multi-spot functionality. In fact, it is in my experience the most transparent way of gathering and presenting exposure measurement information in a camera allowing for complete control and visibility of how the chosen exposure relates to the actual measurements (and not just one measurement, but up to 9 measurements at the same time).

Ok, I understand... thanks for the explanation, nice system, now I realize that it delivers a very good control.

Anyway usually I'd prefer single spot mode as I easily Lock exposure in the place I want and this many times it's what I want, it's also super fast not having to analyze information on screen. I guess T-90 multi-spot would be very interesting for landscape, perhaps on tripod, not having to make mental efforts with spot readings. For a dynamic shooting you cannot look to the screen, you are devoted to the subject and what illumination does with it.

 

[superflash]

Les Sariles:
fine, thanks.

 

[superflash]

wiltw and Bill Burk:
I understand, you have been very clear.

 

[superflash]

Two other characteristics on which to focus your attention are:

1) the width of the scale where the exposure readings are represented; this range is important because the wider it is, the more you have the opportunity to place on the scale all the values that the exposure meter reads from time to time. This also allows you to read and understand immediately the distribution of luminances in the scene and to establish the reciprocal contrast ratios between the various tones (for example between high lights and medium gray) how deep the shadows are in terms of stop compared to medium gray and evaluate the total contrast of the scene (theoretical dynamic range) by counting the stops that exist between the reading in the darker area and that in the lighter area.
OM3 and 4 have a scale width of 10EV as in the zonal system, suitable for most cases.
EOS1V and 3 have insufficient scale width of 6EV for all cases.
T90 has a scale size of 8EV
Minolta Program Back Super 90 has a scale of 13EV.
I don't know how multi-spot memory cards work for Minolta xi, i, si, do any of you know them?

2) The accuracy of the measurement scale;
OM3 - 4, T90 and Minolta Program Back Super 90 have 1/2 EV steps
EOS1V and 3 have steps of 1/3 EV
This feature is important especially when working with slides: in this case, it is necessary to accurately evaluate the differences in light between the areas to understand how to select the area of maximum detail and to know if the shadows (or lights) will be legible or not in the final exposure.