Agreed. But if you've got time to take incident light readings, or to spotmeter and assign that vaue to a specific zone, then you probably have time to pop off a test shot and take a look at both the histogram and the exposure.
As someone here pointed out, a dgital camera is by far the best lightmeter you're likely to get your hands on. Given that, it seems seems slightly ridiculous to argue the merits of one form of auto-exposure metering over another. Each have strengths; each have weaknesses. Better by far to learn when to rely on the camera, and when you need to override it. > Except in many situations you can't repeat the shot. My PUG entry this > month is a prime example. > > Bill > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 1:40 PM > Subject: Re: More *ist-D images > > > > > > > > I wonder whether multi-segment metering should be used > > > in constrasty situations with the starkistdee. > > > > Use the histogram if you're in doubt; it's a far better > > exposure guide than *anything* that converts everything > > to a single number without knowing your intentions. > > > > That's a great thing about digital cameras; you can > > take a test exposure, and it's immediately available > > for review. > > > > > >
