Re: R8's Multi-Pattern Metering

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

Any thoughts on the F5's meter
>vs the  R8's?? or the advantages of one or the other?  I do have three Leica
>lenses, a SL and SL2(which I would never part with) to add to the
>equation.... and now a lower price on the M6?  
>Any thoughts on the comparative merits on these three great but diffferent
>models would be appreciated.  
Well, I did a scene-by-scene comparison for the magazine I am writing for 
between the R8 and the F5 metering systems. Using Ektachrome 100S we 
noticed that any scene was exposed slightly different when using Nikon's 
75/25 and 1005matrix pattern and Leica's spot/matrix and integral 
metering.Most differences were within half a stop and occasionally in 
difficult lightning situations one stop. The presumed colourpattern 
recognition ability did not give any significant advantages. However, 
when a scene had a dominant colour (i.e.  a green field) the Nikon 
adjusted its exposure with 1/3 (mostly) to 1/2 (sometimes) stop. I would 
give any metering system high ratings. The small adjustments on the 
over/under exposure side are noticably but not big enough to say that any 
system outperforms any other in every lightning situation. Here the 
intelligence and perception (and personal tastes) of the photographer 
still outweigh the machine. Personally I was very happy with 
Leica'spotmeter (accurate but only for the experienced user)  and its 
matrix meter. The difference in most situations with the integral meter 
was however slight, but it had the edge. The F5 1005 pattern was as good 
as any but it showed no significant advantage, You still had to 
think/adjust for best results in difficult situations.  
The SL(2) has an accurate spotmeter. But most scenes do not require such 
precise metering. In fact using only the spotmeer and metering the 
'wrong' spot results in a higher percentage of bad pictures. A spot-only 
camera needs a handheld meter for most scenes.
Hopes this helps
Erwin Puts