Do SLR's have better light meters than Rangefinders?

[drjoke]

I was reading about Nikon FA, and it's innoative metrix metering system. Do rangefinders today have that? I am using the current Zeiss Ikon. Would my light meter be primitive or does it already include some metrix technology?

[toyotadesigner]

The Zeiss does have a very good metering system - center weighed. It's similar to the Contax G2.

I have a Matrix metering in my Nikon F4s but never used it because I've grown up with the center weighed method.

The best metering you can get still is an external or handheld light meter from Gossen or Sekonic.

But I think it all depends on what you are shooting. I could imagine that a Matrix could be great for 'street', sports and events.

I've never had any problems with my Contax G2 metering system. A matrix metering would require a hughe database and thus processors and a lot of electronic stuff in your camera - too many thing that might go wrong :D

[migtex]

From a technical point of view, yes they have.
If one knows how to use them.... only one may say!

[JNewell]

In real life(tm), I have not found my M6s or R-D1 less effective than advanced SLRs like the F4, N90x or similar cameras. Maybe an F6 or F100 would be better - I doubt it, though.

[40oz]

advanced metering systems like the matrix systems used in modern SLR cameras are there so the user doesn't have to pay attention to the exposure. Same with autofocus. The argument apparently is that a camera selling for what a top line pro model does should have features enabling even the most inexperienced to get a good photo simply by framing and pressing the shutter.

Those auto settings aren't there because they take better pictures, they are there because they help someone with very little experience get properly exposed shots.

It's similar to the electronic traction and stability modes on BMW and Mercedes cars. They aren't there to help the experienced driver get around the track faster. They are there to keep inexperienced drivers who really shouldn't be driving a 400 hp car keep it on the road.

Thankfully, even the most inexperienced can practice and see much success even without the benefit of complex matrix metering and advanced autofocus. Bottom line - complicated matrix metering isn't better than center-weighting or spot metering, it's just more complicated.

[drjoke]

Then wouldn't spot metering be helpful? Why isn't it included in my camera? I take many street shots in Thailand. Between noon and 3pm, it's very contrasty and I miss exposure too many of my shots. I figure a hand-held meter would be too slow to use, but I never handled one before.

I will probably have to learn manual compensation myself then.

[toyotadesigner]

Then wouldn't spot metering be helpful?

Not necessarily because even with spot metering you'll have to do your own math for the situation. A compensation dial like on top of the G2 would be of much more help.

Why isn't it included in my camera?

Because the Zeiss is not a mass market model, it's targeted to experienced photographers.

I take many street shots in Thailand. Between noon and 3pm, it's very contrasty and I miss exposure too many of my shots.

Just use a substitute reading from a dark area which is identical to your darkest parts in the scene.

I figure a hand-held meter would be too slow to use, but I never handled one before.

It is slow, but you only need to measure once with the incident light meter close to one object and keep the exposure as long as the light doesn't change too much. But you can do the same with your camera by using a gray card or the palm of your hand in front of the camera in the critical light where you want to take your images. Using your palm requires that you open up 1 f stop.

I will probably have to learn manual compensation myself then.

If you want to master the situations you have mentioned - yes :D - see above. Measuring light is not that difficult.

If you shoot b&w or negative the measuring is not as critical as if shooting slides. Just keep in mind to measure the most important part of your scene at close up.

[JNewell]

Spot metering is exactly the opposite of matrix and similar metering. It's very easy to goof if you don't know how to use the meter.

My own experience, though, is that advanced metering isn't really much of an improvement over centerweighted metering, which is what the M6 delivers (which is counterintuitive when you look at the spot on the shutter curtain, but the diagram that either Popular or Modern published when they tested the meter showed a very Nikon-like centerweighting).

[Joe Brugger]

I was reading about Nikon FA, and it's innovative matrix metering system. Do rangefinders today have that? I am using the current Zeiss Ikon. Would my light meter be primitive or does it already include some matrix technology?

Innovative in 1984, of course. There have been some advances. The ZI is center-weighted in about the same manner as the Nikon FM2n and is not especially sophisticated. No CPU evaluation like the newer SLRs.

Minolta's CLE read off a dot pattern on the curtain and then off the film plane during exposure. That's the most sophisticated system I can think of in a film RF. It's good, but easy to fool with strong backlight.

What you really look for in a meter is predictability and consistency. The Nikon F100 (and later) meters are good enough that they rarely need correction. Other SLRs are probably about the same.

[MCTuomey]

I shoot an M7 and a number of Canon 1-series bodies. In absolute terms, I have no idea which is better. They're different. The Canon bodies seem to require 1/3-2/3 stop positive exposure compensation, while the M7 seems not to need it. Of course I'm generalizing. Like others say, you just have to know the camera's metering well enough to be able to adjust for the exposure you want.

[Morca007]

I don't know if it's more or less accurate, but I far prefer the way my Bessa R displays it's reading to my FG or N80.