Why no multi-spot metering for Olympus DSLRs ?

[melvinch]

In the past, Olympus flagship camera OM-4 has the most advance multi-spot metering built into the camera with both hilight and shadow control.

Why can't they build those functions into their DSLRs ?

[microcosm]

Originally Posted by melvinch In the past, Olympus flagship camera OM-4 has the most advance multi-spot metering built into the camera with both hilight and shadow control. Why can't they build those functions into their DSLRs ?

As compared to which camera in the DSLR? The new cameras simply renamed them as "ESP metering" with Highlight and Shadow control.

[drakon09]

Stick with spot or centre-weighted.

Works WAYYY better anyway.

[melvinch]

Originally Posted by microcosm As compared to which camera in the DSLR? The new cameras simply renamed them as "ESP metering" with Highlight and Shadow control.

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II has true multispot metering.

ESP is a form of evaluative metering and is not same with multi-spot metering.

[drakon09]

Multi-spot is evaluative, i.e. it meters the highs and lows then averages it out.

It's just a different way to describe the same thing.

[melvinch]

If that is so, that means every metering mode is also evaluative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metering_mode

[Tetrode]

Originally Posted by drakon09 Multi-spot is evaluative, i.e. it meters the highs and lows then averages it out. It's just a different way to describe the same thing.

Not true, there is a difference. With multispot - you are in control of the areas you want the meter to give weight to. While with multi-segment or evaluative meters, the camera's cpu is in control - you don't have full control.

[drakon09]

So use spot metering and meter what you need/want to.

That way you have full control.

[Tetrode]

Originally Posted by drakon09 So use spot metering and meter what you need/want to. That way you have full control.

You obviously don't get it.

[drakon09]

Oh believe me. I do.

I'm just choosing not to answer the question directly.

[NMSS_2]

Originally Posted by Tetrode Not true, there is a difference. With multispot - you are in control of the areas you want the meter to give weight to. While with multi-segment or evaluative meters, the camera's cpu is in control - you don't have full control.

While multi spot metering is kinda of cool thing to have, it is still another way of evaluating a particular scene on getting the exposure that you want. even with multi-segment or evaluative metering, you can be in control with +/- ev compensation. that is provided that you understand how your metering works in any lighting situation. But of course that multispot gives a more accurate exposure value in non-fast pace shooting environment.

regardless of whether you can multi spot with canon pro-range camera or evaluative metering with normal camera, the DR range is still the same for the type of sensor that you might be using. you will still have blown highlights or unrecoverable shadows details.

multispot metering is something nice to have but not entirely necessary ........ just like LiveView.

[Tetrode]

Originally Posted by NMSS_2 While multi spot metering is kinda of cool thing to have, it is still another way of evaluating a particular scene on getting the exposure that you want. even with multi-segment or evaluative metering, you can be in control with +/- ev compensation. that is provided that you understand how your metering works in any lighting situation. But of course that multispot gives a more accurate exposure value in non-fast pace shooting environment.

Therein lies the problem - how do you understand what the CPU is thinking when in many cases it is drawing from a database of thousands of recorded metering instances (as in the Nikon colour meter) and several meter segments (each weighted differently)? There is no way you can predict what these meters are doing accurately (so that you can override them with confidence).

There is still a use of multispot meters. All multispot metering is, is a spot meter with an averaging function.

[zuikoku]

imo, the most complex lighting condition usually could be held no more than 3 spot on multi spot metering system.
Other than that usually will be covered by centerweighted or multi-metering zone which implemented by respective brand.

Yes I agree, Olympus should include this multi-spot metering capabilities for the next professional D-SLR body. Since this feature is the legendary on SLR history.

[microcosm]

Originally Posted by Tetrode You obviously don't get it.

Interesting why you said that. What did he not get as I am a little lost with this reply.

[microcosm]

Originally Posted by Tetrode Therein lies the problem - how do you understand what the CPU is thinking when in many cases it is drawing from a database of thousands of recorded metering instances (as in the Nikon colour meter) and several meter segments (each weighted differently)? There is no way you can predict what these meters are doing accurately (so that you can override them with confidence). There is still a use of multispot meters. All multispot metering is, is a spot meter with an averaging function.

That is why the basics of photography and understanding light is very important. How can a good photograph be captured without first understanding how you want to capture light? Then it is up to the shooter to decide which area can he afford to lose in order to get that image he wanted?


Obviously her blouse is blown out, but the exposure on her skin is accurate. Thankfully the subject is fair.

Originally Posted by zuikoku imo, the most complex lighting condition usually could be held no more than 3 spot on multi spot metering system. Other than that usually will be covered by centerweighted or multi-metering zone which implemented by respective brand. Yes I agree, Olympus should include this multi-spot metering capabilities for the next professional D-SLR body. Since this feature is the legendary on SLR history.

I only want even smaller spot on my camera for spot metering. In that way I get a slightly more accurate exposure. LOL.

[Tetrode]

Originally Posted by microcosm Interesting why you said that. What did he not get as I am a little lost with this reply.

I've already explained in my previous posts.

[Tetrode]

Originally Posted by microcosm That is why the basics of photography and understanding light is very important. How can a good photograph be captured without first understanding how you want to capture light? Then it is up to the shooter to decide which area can he afford to lose in order to get that image he wanted? Obviously her blouse is blown out, but the exposure on her skin is accurate. Thankfully the subject is fair. I only want even smaller spot on my camera for spot metering. In that way I get a slightly more accurate exposure. LOL.

Obviously you don't get it either. And I'd concentrate on other things other than your exposure - like focussing and setting the right shutter speed to minimise subject movement.

[drakon09]

Well, we'll allow you the last word on it, ok?

[Tetrode]

Originally Posted by drakon09 Well, we'll allow you the last word on it, ok?

Thanks!

[Hacker]

Originally Posted by Tetrode Therein lies the problem - how do you understand what the CPU is thinking when in many cases it is drawing from a database of thousands of recorded metering instances (as in the Nikon colour meter) and several meter segments (each weighted differently)? There is no way you can predict what these meters are doing accurately (so that you can override them with confidence). There is still a use of multispot meters. All multispot metering is, is a spot meter with an averaging function.

I definitely agree. I may need to have the darkest and lightest area of a certain subject within a picture frame measured. Anyway, the best bet is a lightmeter like the Sekonic 758 or just bracket the shot.