spot metering

J

jc101

Suspended / Banned
Messages
124
Name
james
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, How much difference is there between spot metering and partial metering? Only ask as been reading about spot, but my camera doesnt have it! Obviously you are metering a larger area, but is it still small enough to use like spot metering? Thanks.
 
You could always zoom in to your subject, take a reading, then recompose?
Partial or centre weighted metering will give an average reading, unlike the spot meterings accuracy.
 
I think the canon partial is 9% and the spot is 3
 
jc101 - here's my long experienced thoughts on spot meters for you...

For my first 10 years I didn't have spot metering on my cameras. For my last 20 years it's been on every one

I think I used it once in the late 1980's

In film days there was a point to it, but the camera's usual 3% or worse isn't a small enough spot to be really useful. If you really need spot metering you're going to have a buy a £500+ external meter - then you take several readings and decide on an average suitable for the shot (which is what partial metering is)

Worst way going... your expensive meter says X and as you chimp the shot you realise the exposure isn't quite right, so you add in a bit of exp compensation - thereby wasting your spot metering efforts and getting results closer to what your camera would have said in the first place

Camera metering systems these days are FAB (even Canon's ;)) - and blinkies show you when they've get it wrong - knowing what to do at that point is far more useful than any spot metering IMHO

If I didn't have it on my cameras now - I wouldn't even notice

DD
 
Spot on DD :lol:

Joking aside, I agree.
 
I use spot metering when there is a small part of the scene which I'd like to get exposed correctly, the clock tower on a floodlit building for example. Yes, you can use the multi or centre weighted and use the exposure compensation to try and correct, which you may also have to do with the spot meter, but you should be a closer to the perfect exposure using the spot meter imho.
 
As said above a lot of it comes down to experience. My camera is nearly always on partial metering. I know what part of the scene it measures and I can get the exposure I was expecting..... most of the time :)
 
I rarely take my camera off it's multi segment metering mode. It copes with almost all situations including backlit subjects.
If I am looking for a special effect such a silhouette I'll use Manual mode and shoot several bracketed exposures.
 
arclight said:
I rarely take my camera off it's multi segment metering mode. It copes with almost all situations including backlit subjects.
If I am looking for a special effect such a silhouette I'll use Manual mode and shoot several bracketed exposures.
Click to expand...

I use 'smart' matrix metering all the time too. It's amazingly good. On the odd occasion where it doesn't quite work, I check the histogram and adjust with exposure compensation.

I find this much better and easier than faffing about with spot and manual.

Spot metering is really only relevant for film photography - it was just one of the tools used then (not always easy) to get accurate exposure when there was no way of knowing before the film was processed. We didn't even have sophisticated matrix metering then (it was quite crude, and not very 'smart') and certainly no histogram! All those old tricks, and skills, are redundant now.
 
Steve Smith said:
What do you mean then?!!! For some of us it's still relevant now.

Well, my 20 year old Nikon F601 has matrix metering.

Steve.
Click to expand...

That's cool, whatever works for you ;) But dare I say that old habits die hard? I just find modern matrix metering is so good and spot is relatively cumbersome and slow, and needs careful skill. I find tweaking the histogram is easier, and can never be wrong. My Canon 40D has spot, but I never use it.

But joking aside, if you know what you're doing with spot metering, it's obviously very good. Using skill and craftsmanship is all part of the pleasure of doing the job well. But it's hard to deny that matrix is better for most people, as it requires no knowledge.

Nikon was the first with multi-pattern metering, and it was a big advance on centre-weighted, but nowhere near as good as reliable/clever as modern matrix metering with its smart anlalysis of different light values. It does much more than simply scramble everything into 18% grey (or is it 12% with digital?)
 
HoppyUK said:
That's cool, whatever works for you ;)
Nikon was the first with multi-pattern metering, and it was a big advance on centre-weighted, but nowhere near as good as reliable/clever as modern matrix metering with its smart anlalysis of different light values.

It does much more than simply scramble everything into 18% grey (or is it 12% with digital?)
Click to expand...

Of the three metering modes on my camera I find that centre wieghted is the least good. At one time it was seen as the bees knees on cameras when an overall average metering mode was the norm.
 
Having just moved up to a 30D I've got spot metering for the first time.

Although not an expert in these matters (by any definition) I think it would definitely offer better metering of the subject in difficult situations which otherwise would require manual shooting.

Russ
 
The thing about spot metering is that people get drawn into thinking that if the camera just looks at the section of a frame that I want the shot exposed for, it will get it right.

That's not the way it works. It just takes the value in its "spot" and set an exposure to make that tone come out as a mid grey. So if you "spot" off of a white face, you'll need to add at least one stop. If it's a dark green plant, you'll need to lose at least one stop.....etc....etc.....etc.

When I shoot landscapes on film, with a very wide range of light values the spot meter is great. I take a load of readings and sit there working out what are the important parts of the shot, what I will allow to be dark, where I want the highlights to be. From there I will decide on my exposure settings and even then, I'll probably bracket shots either side of that anyway.

If I'm looking at the same scene with a digital camera, I'll forget the meter altogether and take a guess at the exposure. If that's not what I want, then I'll see instantly on the histogram. I can adjust the settings and shoot again to get just the exposure I wanted.

The guy with the spot meter is still taking it out of the case, while I'm left to sit back and enjoy the scene in front of me, knowing I've bagged the shot.

I'm not saying which is more fun, for me it's the slow old film ways but there is no doubting that working off the histogram is way way more efficient.
 
You can't do the Zone System without a spot meter can you?
Mind you - Ansel didn't have a digital camera!

The multi-spot meter on the OM4Ti is about as good as spot meters have ever got in my opinion.
 
I'm using spot metering all the time now. Going back to old school photography! I must say I'm happier with the results I'm getting now I'm using spot metering and thinking about what I'm trying to capture as opposed to using matrix metering. For me, it definitely gets exposure right.
 
Manual and spot for me all the time too.
 
Woz! said:
You can't do the Zone System without a spot meter can you?
Mind you - Ansel didn't have a digital camera!
Click to expand...

Dazz makes some good points about spot metering, which goes to show that it can often lead people astray if you don't know what you're doing.

And Ansel Adams' technique was different, because he shot negatives, and messed about with chemicals in a way that modified the tonal range. In other words, there were two very distinct parts to his image making - shooting and processing the neg, then making the print. Taking very careful exposure meter readings from all over the scene was central to this.

Shooting digital is like shooting slide (positive) film - there is no second part to the process.

Oh dear, now I can hear the Raw 'digital negative' debate coming. Bring it on! I'll just say 'digital latent image' instead :)
 
HoppyUK said:
But it's hard to deny that matrix is better for most people, as it requires no knowledge.
Click to expand...

More convenient maybe, not necessarily better. ;) :lol:

If your ignorant of your options then you won't know what is better. :shrug: Try everything on your camera, one of the reasons for having a DSLR is more control over your picture taking. Whether you choose to take advantage of all that control is another thing, but at least be aware of what your camera can do. ;)
 
James, it's down to personal preferences.

I believe there is a video on the use of zone systems which heavily relies on spot metering. so that might be quite useful to watch. I personally wouldn't abide all its suggestions. but there are plenty of things you can pickup using spot metering in order to produce a well composed shot, such as obtaining finer details in the highlights and shadow regions and what f-stop ND grads to use etc.

Spot metering is useful in harsh lighting conditions, to identify things that will not show up on your shot ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top