I agree that for someone who knows what he is doing the OM4 exposure
system is a very useful tool. I have also found that both with the
Coolpix 5700 and D100 the matrix metering pretty well nails the
exposure most of the time. Certainly better than the OM does without
using some adjustment by the knowledgeable photographer for the
situation. It even takes into account scenes in which there may be
highlight blow out and reduces exposure to save the picture. I felt
comfortable with the OM exposure system, but overall I think I do a
little better with the Nikons. On the other hand when it is in error
it is more puzzling because of its complexity. I think that possibly
metering reliablity has jumped ahead since the F5 because of the
technique of matching the matrix pattern to a data base of patterns for
perfectly exposed scenes stored in the camera circuitry rather than
doing a rote combination of sector inputs. Similar systems are used by
both Nikon and Canon. I am not sure who else uses that method.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Oct 15, 2004, at 5:13 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>
> There is at least one thing that I can't agree is the "sophisticated"
> auto
> exposure system, I would call them "fancy" exposure system. I have use
> some
> of the later SLRs and I don't think they are any better than the OM4's
> exposure system. I did read an exposure test from Pop Photo some years
> ago,
> the most "sophisticated" N*kon F5 was one of the poorest.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|