----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Zendel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Tim, > Please, let us know your findings. > CraigZ
I got back the trannies that I used to compare the Minolta light meter with the EOS 1v. While this wasn't the most scientific test I have done it was carefully shot on a tripod ensuring consistent lighting conditions. I actually shot five separate outdoor situations which ranged from full shade - full sun - backlit, including a gray card, and an indoor portrait shoot to test flash metering. Some of the results were a little surprising. The gray card was shot outdoors in diffuse lighting and was the only similar reading I got from the two meters. The difference was only 1/3 stop and needless to say the results were fine. A shot of a white vehicle in full shade showed a variation of 2/3 and the 1v was a little underexposed while the handheld meter did a better job. I expected this however and would have normally added some exposure for the white vehicle. A shot of a multicoloured brick wall which was half in full sun and half in shade gave a variation of two full stops. I re-metered both pieces of equipment several times but continually got the same two stop difference. In this case the 1v gave the lighter reading and opened up considerably for the shadows. The result might be considered slightly overexposed but is certainly the more useable shot of the two. The handheld meter result is too dark with little detail in the shaded half but a more authentic colour in the bricks which had full sun. I also shot this at the middle of the two metered settings and this is the best exposure. This pattern occurred in other test shots which included full sun and shaded areas. I shot two scenes of a tree with varied mid to light coloured leaves which were back (slightly side) lit by the sun. Blue sky in frame but not the sun itself. The difference between the meters was 2 1/3 and 2 2/3 with the 1v meter giving the lower exposure values. In both cases the handheld meter rea ding gave well overexposed results while the 1v results were spot on with nice blue sky and correct colours in the foliage. This sort of surprised me as I thought the ambient reading would be more reliable in this situation. There was one sequence where I did include the sun in frame and again the 1v got it right while the Minolta meter over exposed. For the flash test I set x synch speed on the 1v and manual full flash on the EX550. I shot at the indicated aperture from the handheld meter, then with shutter and aperture the same in M mode, I put the flash into E-TTL mode and shot again. I did the same with 1/2 power flash and a new set of readings. In both sets the handheld meter results are slightly over exposed with obvious flash and fairly unflattering. In contrast the E-TTL shots are nicely exposed with no blown out highlights. For good measure I also shot one in full auto camera & flash which is also fine. So, you asked and I told you. Make of it what you will but I will probably not be purchasing the handheld meter for the type of work I do. As I look at the slides I feel that on several occasions the best result would be to meter both ways then start at the middle and bracket, but overall the 1v does such a good and consistent job that it is an unnecessary extra step. I've spent a lot of years getting used to what my camera meter tells me and it rarely lets me down. Geez I love my EOS gear.... Regards, Tim www.timmunro.com.au * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
