glenn_blaszkiewicz1 Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I am wondering how everyone feels about Nikon's matrix metering. I ask this because I am considering having a couple of my MF lenses "chipped" for the added bonus of matrix metering on my F100. I know the advantages it creates with flash photo's. But when it comes to everyday, daylight photo's do you think it gives that much of an advantage over center weighted metering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn_blaszkiewicz1 Posted October 19, 2003 Author Share Posted October 19, 2003 I forgot to mention the two lenses I am thinking about having "chipped" are a 28mm f2.8 AIS and a 105mm f1.8 AIS. Also, I mostly shoot daytime nature style work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yada_wack Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 To be honest, after years of shooting, I can careless about any of it. TTL, Matrix.. etc.. I use a cheapo $9.99 Vivitar 2000 and just by hitting the test flash button, I know what A/S to set at and get it right by at least 90%. The rest the lab can take care of. There is no advantage one mode over another. You have to understand how the camera is metering your subject, or should I say colours. Just find something gray and get your reading off that, this will give you a very accurate reading. Works 100% everytime on my M6 :) However I do have experiences with the F5 Matrix Metering. It is extremely useful for fill flash outdoor. Using it indoor yield less than desirable results for me. My advice to you is finding the right exposures using just spot metering. It is simply the best of all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I usually shoot matrix when using negative film and it seems to do what is needed. In backlight I might add a stop or so. However, with slides I nearly always rely on spot or incident metering and they give more consistent results than matrix (provided that you use them correctly). However, neither can be used for automatic exposure, so the method of choice would depend on how quick you need to be to get the shot. A good reason to have your Ai-S lenses chipped is the fact that the D100 does not meter without the chip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_gifford Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 My N90s in matrix metering mode is a more accurate tool, much of the time, than my EM or FM3A with 60/40 center weighted metering. If I take the time to THINK for a minute about what I'm seeing in the viewfinder, I can do just as well with the center-weighted approach. Really. Brain plus simple meter will do as well as complex meter. But when the contents of the viewfinder are changing constantly and rapidly (following a nine-year old soccer player back and forth into and out of the direct sun, for instance) the matrix metering is a blessing. Sure, get those lovely lenses chipped and enjoy the option of matrix metering when it's the right mode to be in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dj_soroka Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 Well, that depends. None of the Hassleblad 500 series cameras have any meter at all, yet their photos expose 35 mm for all the limitations of the smaller negative. Hassy shooters typically use a hand held incident meter. Matrix metering is a nice to have, if you're in a hurry. If you know (and there's no reason why not to) how to use a center or spot meter, well, then matrix is only nice when you don't have time to think. And if you have and know how to use an incident meter, well, that is even better than matrix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_p3 Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I agree that Matrix is good when your in a hurry, ie. I use it when I'm out getting journalistic shots of protests, etc. When I have the time I prefer to use the in camera spot reading or my handheld Sekonic meter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 The short and accurate answer for me is : "yes." You might not see much a difference if you only shoot negatives. But you need to run your own tests. Assuming you already one or more AF-Nikkor lenses, set your camera to aperture priority control and shoot some A / B test slides in different lighting conditions using center weighted and Matrix metering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 A couple of years ago I bought a Contax 645, which has most modern features such as AF, electronic control, etc. but no matrix metering. After using that for a few months, I came to the conclusion that as long as you have time to adjust your exposure, not having matrix type metering is not a big deal at all. In fact, I prefer to spot meter different parts of the image and adjust exposure manually. However, if you shoot sports, actions or you are a PJ type, matrix metering and the A, S or P mode could be extremely helpful when you have no time to carefully adjust exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lachaine Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 As a 30 year user of centre-weighted meters, I find the matrix meter very useful when the light is not particularly difficult, and I just want to get the picture. It's nice to have it available. Like autofocus, it doesn't mean I use it all the time, in every situation, but I have it when I want it. The nice thing about today's Nikons is that you have a tool available for every situation, and I use all three meters in my F80 at various times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_greenberg Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I agree that matrix metering is no big deal. Whenever you use ANY kind of light metering system you also have to use the most important tool of all, your brain. You have to understand what the meter "see" and how it responds, and in many, MANY instances you have to know what kinds of adjustments to make to your expsosure so that it comes out the way you want it to. Yesterday I was photographing shorebirds at Pt. Reyes (in Marin County, California) using my 80-400 VR lens (you know, the one with the insect inside), and matrix metering by itself produced photos in which a backlit Sanderling was consistently underexposed. Surprisingly to me, spot metering helped only a little. Finally, I had to use exposure compensation to get it the way I wanted it. I probably should also have lowered the contrast level setting on my D100, but I didn't think about it at the time. Also, when you photograph objects that are largely white or black you KNOW the meter will be fooled to some extent. There are no metering panaceas. I got one lens "chipped" already and might get others done, but I did it just so metering would work, period, on my D100. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_andrews Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I use Matrix Metering quite a lot and it orks great, especially for print films. For slide film, I'll often use a spot meter to double-check my matrix meter, and they usually are within 1/3 f-stop of each other. Despite what I've read, I find that the matrix meter on a Nikon is fooled pretty easily. It doesn't take an extreme scene to fool it, either; a single bright flare (from a windshield, let's say) can cause the matrix to mis-read a scene. Not a problem for print film, but for slide film I try to be extra careful. The only camera that I use a center-weighted meter with is my FM2n, and it's a fabulous meter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbq Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 In my experience matrix-metering produces significantly better results than center-weighed if you want to let the camera do all the work. Of course you can always use a spot meter an do all the work "by hand", but that's not what 35mm is for. Matrix metering really has an advantage over traditional metering when in full sunlight, especially when capturing bright scenes. By the way, excellent choice of lenses... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 <I>Of course you can always use a spot meter an do all the work "by hand", but that's not what 35mm is for </I> <p> Is that why 35 mm cameras such as the $300 F70 has a spot meter, but the cheapest Hasselblad with one is the 205FCC with a $7670 price tag? Looks like the people voted differently. There are some thinking photographers who use 35 mm, apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_warn Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 It depends on what film you are shooting and how much experience that you have. Negative films have so much latitude that I don't see much need for matrix metering, center weighted will do just fine. With slide films, if you have some experience, center weighted will work very well because you know when to over ride the meter. I would not go to the expense of chipping a lens unless I only wanted to use an automatic mode without providing any input. Even then I would hesitate, in my experience centerweighted is good for about 95 out of 100 shots and matrix only about 98 out of 100. Is the extra 3 frames in 100 worth the expense? That is something you have to decide. Don't get me wrong, matrix metering is great and I use it the most. My point is that the center weighted metering is also a really good system and that it may not be worth the expense of chipping your lenses just to step up to the matrix system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Stone Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 Matrix metering is one of the reasons to shoot Nikon. Nobody is forced to use it on the F100, but I find that I use it a lot. Not every shot is one that can be fussed over, and one can miss an oportunity if they aren't ready to shoot. Of course not every shot is a keeper, but the more one shoots, the more keepers one gets. No, I don't mean blindly pointing and shooting and then hoping for the best, just being ready to take advantage when the chance comes along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn_blaszkiewicz1 Posted October 19, 2003 Author Share Posted October 19, 2003 Thanks to everyone for your input on my question. In the end, I think I will not be having the chip put in to the lenses. If I do, it will probably only be in the 28mm f2.8 AIS. I think the matrix metering could be of more use with the wide angle lens. I shoot about 75% slides and I have a lot of use using center weighted metering but I have not used the spot meter as much. When you think about it, untill about 10 years ago or so we didn't have matrix metering. And as near as I can remember I took some good photos back in those days:-). My other lenses are all AF lenses (50mm f1.8D, 180mm f2.8D and 300mm f4) and I can honestly say that I have not seen a big differance in photos taken with these lenses and matrix metering. Thanks again to everyone for your input! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas k. Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 Rather than doing expensive mods, you're better off learning how to accurately measure light with center-weighted meters or even buying a handheld meter (faster, more accurate readings as long as you're in the same light as the subject). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Stone Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 "When you think about it, untill about 10 years ago or so we didn't have matrix metering. And as near as I can remember I took some good photos back in those days:-)." Glenn, with all due respect, that statement is void of any valid reasoning. Using your thinking, there's no valid reason to ever use any new tecnological advance, including digital cameras that weren't around 10 years ago. If you don't want to use Matrix metering, then don't. But don't tell us that it isn't better than center weighted metering under most conditions. That simply isn't true. One can also use spot metering, and take readings all over the place, but if that were the best way to do things, Matrix wouldn't be offered. Everything has it's place, and Matrix metering has definitely established itself. If your intent is to fool Matrix metering, then you must be aware that nothing is foolproof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith alan sprouse Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 I guess I'd want to know how much it would cost to get your lenses chipped before I could answer. If it doesn't cost too much, then I'd do it, as it's nice to have the matrix metering option (even if you don't NEED it). If it does cost a lot, then I'd have to give it more thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Spot metering <I>is</I> the best way to do it (or maybe incident in some cases) if you care about the technical quality of the result. Matrix is offered because it is <I>fast</I> and requires no brains which is perfect for most 35 mm photographers or negative film. Ever seen a matrix in a medium format camera? Why don't they have it, yet many of them do have cw and spot. The answer is obvious: nobody would want to waste such a large piece of film by relying on an algorithm which does not tell the user what its doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cham_saranasuriya Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Hi Glenn, I am sure it is not a must and agree with the others who suggested. Afterall more important is the photographer rather than the camera it self!!! Certainly it makes flash exposure easy - what I do with my F5. It is like having a manual or an auto gear car. Some people like the manual and do it all (what I prefer) and others like auto. Certaiinly auto is helpful during traffic!!! A better option is triptronic in a Porsche but I cannot afford one!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_helleck1 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Just an Idea. Have you considered a body that can matrix meter with AI/AIS lenses? Might be cheaper than chipping all your good old primes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 There are many different versions (or levels) of matrix metering. Matrix metering first came on the scene back in 1984 with the Nikon FA and AI-S lenses. It has since been refined many times. Matrix metering with no-CPU lenses is not nearly as advanced as that requires CPU lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now