If it doesn't bother you don't worry about it. The best way to compare is get hold of a handheld meter and compare some reading on more average areas. Example, if the sun is shining on green grass, a medium brown fence, or a gray conrete walkway. Compare the ambient light with teh reflective reading of the EOS3. Granted it be be off a bit, but these are close to an 18% gray card and you should see about the same reading. I typically read ambient light using a group of cypress trees and my EOS3 is dead on. THen again, I had this underexposure problem and sent it to Canon for a checkup. Mine was an early model bought in 1999 and underexposure was more severe than what you describe. Peter K
I was thinking the same thing. I was recently doing some wild life photography (my two year old in the yard) and had my Sekonic L-508 out and realized that I have never really compared readings from the meter and the camera, I have an EOS A2. I used the meter on 1% spot and my A2 on spot, it's 3% if I remember right, and all the readings were the same. The day was cloudy after a storm so the clouds and sun were in and out every few minutes so I had a chance to compare in different lighting. Since that day I find myself using spot metering on the camera more. The roll of film I shot that day, Kodak elite chrome 100, came out great. I have been thinking about a upgrade to the EOS 3 though. Maybe I'll sick with my A2. Tom * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
