Things that seem "too easy" can sometimes be hard to trust.
When cake mixes came out many years ago they didn't need anything except water, and they didn't sell well. They tasted fine and they cooked fine, those weren't the issues. The problem was that they were too easy, it was tough for people to think of those cakes as home-made; so the manufacturers changed the recipes and made us add eggs and they started selling well.
Matrix metering works really well and is really fast.
Sure, if I whip out the incident meter I might be able to improve things, a little; same if I decide to spot meter, again a little. The difference in most situations is normally pretty minor or nonexistent right off the bat, and with a bit of experience, a little thought, and AE lock on occasion, it can become a nearly bullet proof method.
You're right, I use several AI'd lenses and forgot they were slightly different from manufactors AIYou are not reading the manual correctly I'm afraid. I don't want to be pedanticbut this will be found on searches and is, I'm sorry, wrong.
On page 86 a table clearly shows Matrix metering is Compatible with Ai and Ai-S lenses, the limitation is with lenses modified to Ai by the Nikon or other kit. This is because original AI / Ai-S lenses have lugs built into the back of them to give the meter extra information. These lugs were not added with Nikon's AI conversion and are necessary for the matrix metering of the F4 or FA.
The table appears in the F4/ F4s Manual referenced as Printed in Japan 9&141-804 (S155)
Are you getting confused with the Programmed Auto Exposure Modes (PH, P) these require a CPU enabled lens and if selected without such a lens will show A (Aperture Priority) and turn off matrix metering, showing CW enabled, in that mode?
I cannot see anywhere in the manual which states, as you say, a switch to CW just by mounting an AI/AIs lens, if I am wrong please quote the entry.
You're right, I use several AI'd lenses and forgot they were slightly different from manufactors AI
A common "error" , forgive and forget
I have used matrix metering when I first got an F100 and shot slides and negatives but then switched to CW and sometimes spot metering. I felt that the matrix metering was calibrated for slides as it tends to underexpose, and the slides that I shot with matrix metering was much better than the negatives (mono and color). And since the matrix mode has a mind of its own, literally, I found it hard to compensate so I just stayed clear of it.
I'm glad to hear this. At this point my photography requires I concentrate on subject and composition. Freeing up a little brain power from worrying about exposure (somewhat) helps. I have found the matrix meter in my D90 is about a stop pessimistic in bright situations. I'm checking the F5 on the last 2 rolls,one unfinished so we'll see.
It's the first time I hear it's meant primarily for slides.
It's not, matrix metering is matched to an ISO standard. A 400 speed film is a 400 speed film...
Matrix metering is based on lots of testing done to see how (most) people like their shots to print/display. That doesn't mean it works for everybody, many people shoot and print their negative film differently because they can, not necessarily because they need to. Others have a real need or want to print more detail than a typical "slide" exposure might give them; that's just a technical correction to their personal E.I. based on their artistic preference.
Things that seem "too easy" can sometimes be hard to trust.
When cake mixes came out many years ago they didn't need anything except water, and they didn't sell well. They tasted fine and they cooked fine, those weren't the issues. The problem was that they were too easy, it was tough for people to think of those cakes as home-made; so the manufacturers changed the recipes and made us add eggs and they started selling well.
Matrix metering works really well and is really fast.
Sure, if I whip out the incident meter I might be able to improve things, a little; same if I decide to spot meter, again a little. The difference in most situations is normally pretty minor or nonexistent right off the bat, and with a bit of experience, a little thought, and AE lock on occasion, it can become a nearly bullet proof method.
It's certainly based on a lot of testing using slide and print film.
BTW, I read a certain Kodak publication stating that their Ektachrome Panther slide film was designed to be exposed using in-camera metering systems (whatever that means :confused.
I've had no difficulties exposing B&W and colour print film with my FA, F90 and F90X camera in their matrix mode. It's the first time I hear it's meant primarily for slides.
I'm sorry, I'm just not buying into that. But then again all my meters could have been faulty.
I've had no difficulties exposing B&W and colour print film with my FA, F90 and F90X camera in their matrix mode. It's the first time I hear it's meant primarily for slides.
I've learned from all the years that, without matrix I can get more predictable results.
Despite owning an F4(e), a couple of F5s and an F6, I have yet to ever use the "matrix" metering function on any of these cameras. Why not? Mostly because I prefer using manual focus lenses when shooting with my SLRs. Since the F5 does not allow use of matrix metering with manual focus lenses, and I often shoot with several bodies, I almost always have the cameras set to the same center-weighted setting. So, a couple of questions for owners of Nikons with matrix capabilities, and more narrowly, to those who shoot transparency films. 1. What is your overall assessment of matrix metering? 2. Are their particular shooting situations where you would avoid using the setting? 3. Are their any particular transparency films that do not lend themselves to matrix metering?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?