> Will the light meter of the 3 give the correct exposure
> values
> > or
> > > should I make corrections? If I have to correct, by how much?
I'm looking at some prints I shot yesterday of a tobogganing party. I used an
Elan II and 70-200/2.8L with Kodak Gold 100 film (the cheap stuff) exposed at
an EI of 64. There was enough cloud that there were no distinct shadows. I
left the camera on manual exposure and set an exposure of +2 on the snow.
This gave settings of f2.8 and 1/750 S. I made a few shots, and then realized
that the camera was in evaluative mode. I changed it to partial metering, and
set f2.8, 1/1500 S for a +2 reading on the snow, and then finished off the
roll.
In the end, it doesn't make a significant difference. The snow is somewhat
blown out in all the prints, but the subjects (kids on toboggans) are fine,
with good saturated colours. If the sunlight isn't changing, I prefer to use
manual mode so that the camera doesn't try to compensate for my composition.
Print film (at least the Gold 100) is very tolerant of "over exposure"
(remember I was already rating it at ISO 64). If I was using slide film, I
would spot meter the snow at +2 stops, and try to stay on the sunny side of
the subjects.
Since I haven't used an EOS 3, I can't comment on the accuracy of its light
meter in the snow. I do know that the evaluative metering in the EOS 5 works
better under these conditions than the Elan II (maybe because it has more
metering segments), and I would expect the EOS 3 to be no worse than the 5.
Geoff Doane, Halifax, N.S.
(Where we will get another foot of snow tonight!)
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
