Subject: | [OM] C5050 as a meter, was Quick Poll |
---|---|
From: | Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Wed, 3 Sep 2003 06:27:14 +0100 |
That is the most interesting little dissertation that I have read on digital cameras so far Wayne. It makes the C5050 sound really quite interesting. I agree with your point that, to be effective, your metering has to be relevant to the tonality of the subject; and I find it an interesting idea that you can check the colour map that results from treating this or that part of the scene as the middle tone; but is it not ironic that you can do this with a camera whose results you can check immediately, albeit on a tiny screen? With a film camera you get around the problem of uncertain tonality, surely, by making an assessment with your meter and bracketing the exposure by however much you judge necessary. For me, bracketing is not second nature and I tend to average middle tones (or the ones that I think important to the scene) using the OM4's spot meter. The disadvantages of the C5050 are the alleged colour fringing and the limited top ISO. I have to keep reminding myself of these otherwise I should be in the shop I looked in yesterday, in Cambridge, spending money on it ;-) Chris On Tuesday, Sep 2, 2003, at 14:53 Europe/London, W Shumaker wrote: The camera does not make a better photographer. I have been workingsnip <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. +44 (0)7092 251126 ftog at threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] Albert's dilema..., Danrich |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] Quick Poll, What supplements your OM?, Chris Barker |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] Quick Poll, What supplements your OM?, W Shumaker |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] C5050 as a meter, was Quick Poll, Danrich |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |