On Sun, 28 Oct 2001 19:48:55 -0500, you wrote: >If all meter modes replied the same exposure, we would only need one >meter mode in lieu of 5 or 6. The reason for the different readings is >one is reading a much wider area than the other two. The evaluative >mode is preferred for a better overall exposure. Very generally, the >spot and partial modes would be preferred if you were more concerned >with better exposure for one particular area in the image. > >If you do not understand the principals of each different mode of >exposure, you need to study and experiment. If you shoot film, you >should shoot low ASA slide film for the most critical evaluation.
I do understand them, Ray. That's why the results surprised me. There was almost no variation in light intensity over the field of view, certainly not 2/3 stop. It was just an evenly lit stucco wall. I tried also partial metering over different areas of the scene to be sure, both with the 9.5% partial in the Elan 7, and with the 12% partial in the FTbN. No change. Not even a needle dip in the FTbN. In a scene with a wide range of light intensities, yes, of course I would expect different results with the 3 modes, and I use partial most of the time becuase it's closest to the spot metering I wish I had. I can read off high and low lit areas and make my own decisions regarding the averaging, even though the evaluative mode is remarkably good. By the way, the Elan 7 has no spot mode - just CW, Partial and Eval. Ken * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
