The auto aperture mode in these cameras always felt flimsy and unprecise, as if the needle had to settle into a nearby detent rather than simply freeze in place when I half-pressed the shutter release.
The problem with them is that if you're taking pictures in marginal light, say 1/30 at f/1.7 or so, many of these cameras lock up the shutter release if there's not enough light (if it can't open the aperture up more). I tried this with a few cameras -- I tested it by finding a marginal ambient light scene and I moved the camera just enough toward a light source so that the shutter would release. While that exposure should have then been wide open at 1/30, the lack of precision seemed to always stop the lens down a little when the shutter release was pressed. While the answer in this case would be to use the light meter reading and then set the exposure manually, it didn't do much for my confidence about the camera. It seems the auto modes in these cameras turns the lenses into ones that are 1/2 to 1 stop slower because of this imprecision.
Joe
I�d say the Canon�s exposure automation is better - a lot - than the sunny 16 rule - and it is not always sunny - inside a building for example. Better way to good exposures is to observe what the meter sees and use exposure lock,
Except on sunny days where F16 "rules" AFAIK, you're right. This is the best way to use the camera meter once you take in account the meter's angle and its limitation (18% reflection).
it can read and use half stops very well.
I'm not sure the aperture escapement in auto mode is as precise as you think, Raimo. Look at the lens on auto and depress the shutter half way, slightly changing the orientation of the camera each time. You'll see the aperture that will be used each time. It seems to me that it cannot use that much different positions (unlike "aperture preferred auto" where the speeds can vary precisely and be set at 1/137 or 1/154 for example).
Years ago, when I first used a QL17 (before Pentax got me) I was taking slides, mostly on auto and I remember that sometimes very similar photos (a slight change of angle between them) produced slides that were sometimes a full stop apart.
But I might be wrong. To ascertain what I think, I should bring a QL17 to a repair shop and ask them to test the auto exposure at, say, EV12, EV12.5 and EV13, and see what the camera gives.
As we are here, there is another QL17 specification that makes this camera (and its sibling QL 19 with a 45/1.9) a superior product: for flash photography, once you set the GN on the camera, it closes down the aperture in reaction to the focusing distance, arguably the best way to control flash output as it does not take in account the reflectivity of the scene. What is more impressive here is that the dedicated Canon flash for this camera has two contact so that it will react differently (and accordingly) if the flash is not fully charged.
Cheers,
Andre
