Re: ist D exposure question

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I set the DS by default to Multipattern exposure metering with AE-AF  
linkage. The linkage only works when AF is enabled. When the focus  
point is on center, the metering response curve returns CW Averaging  
results for average scene dynamics.

Presuming on-center focus, the biggest adjustments to CW Averaging  
meter response I see is some compensation for an overly bright sky or  
a severely backlit, small (less than 1/9  of area) subject ... the  
system adds up to .7 EV to those situations under some conditions.  
(Not enough in many cases.) When AF is enabled and an off-center  
subject is locked on, I see the exposure shift slightly as if the  
subject were on the central focus point. A little bit of -EV  
adjustment is enabled for small, brightly lit subjects on a dark  
background, again usually not more than -.7EV (and again not enough).

Once you understand how the evaluative metering responds, you control  
exposure by the EV compensation wheel. It is mostly identical to  
doing the same thing with CW Averaging metering pattern, with the  
added bonus that it will throw in just a little compensation  
automatically for cases where marginal compensation is enough. In  
general, I've found the matrix metering set up to be consistent and  
predictable enough that I only rarely find a need to switch to CW  
Averaging or Spot meter pattern. CW Averaging is a bit more  
predictable than the matrix metering mode until you understand the  
responses, and I tend to prefer it when I'm working Manual exposure  
and mode because I want to be in complete control then. However, I  
tend to use the DS in Av mode the vast majority of the time.

Godfrey


On Mar 20, 2006, at 8:33 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote:

On my D's, I rarely use multipattern.  Pretty much stick with Center
weighted or spot.  To me, the real problem with multipattern is that
it is unpredictable.  You never really know for sure how it comes up
with the exposure.  I have much better luck just using my hard earned
experience in a predictable manner.

--
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, March 20, 2006, 8:14:56 AM, you wrote:

RW> Shel,

RW> Well, I've been shooting slides almost exclusively for
RW> 40 years, and have been using a PZ-1 and PZ-1p for the
RW> last 12 years; so I think I generally have a good
RW> handle on exposure, and I =thought= I would have a
RW> good handle on how a Pentax multipattern meter would
RW> behave.  I usually use spotmetering a lot, but for
RW> quick grabs use multipattern, and was surprised by
RW> these exposures.

RW> Rick

RW> --- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

A better way to be sure you get it right is to learn
how to expose properly
in the first place.  The DS and the D offer spot
metering.  You could try
experimenting (and learning) with that.  Shooting
RAW may give you some
additional latitude, but there is no substitute for
proper exposure.

It sounds like you're relying too much on software
to get good results.  It
may be difficult to return from working in that way.
 Learn the right
exposure in the beginning.  You will have better
photos forever.  By
relying on software, you'll never learn how to
expose.

Shel



[Original Message]
From: Tim Øsleby

Whatever mode you used, my guess is that the
camera went for the grey in
the
sky behind the trees. It can be rather tricky to
figure out what the meter
will think. Also in Av and Tv mode. So there is
only one way to be sure to
get it right. Shooting raw.

When I bought the camera (a DS), I had a lot of
frustrations myself.
After a
while I tried raw, but could not get on top of
converting. Then I
downloaded
Rawshooter Essential. This program has some auto
correction features that
were just what I needed. All I had to do was using
ALT + E, and the
program
suggested a conversion. Often this is close to a
good image, and it sure
was
a good starting point, to play with the image. I
have learned a lot in a
matter of little time using this.

Most likely you will end up using raw sooner or
later. So what I am saying
is that _now_ might be the time to take that step.
The general quality is
better, and it does give you more headroom when
shooting.

Now I have upgraded to RSP, the pay version of
RSE. There I have levels,
curves and cropping in the converter. So now I do
most of the tweaking in
one program. The downside of this is that it makes
me a bad photoshooper.
But for now, I can live with that.





RW> http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW

RW> __________________________________________________
RW> Do You Yahoo!?
RW> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
RW> http://mail.yahoo.com