Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 9/12/00 5:19:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jim_brick@agilent.com writes: << It is my humble opinion, as well as decades of manual cameras and experience, that the Hexar's AE ability contributed little, perhaps nothing, to the picture taking experience and whether the exposures were good or not. As a matter of fact, AE in a restaurant can give you a worse "hit" rate than no AE. >> This has been my experience as well. For available light, I have found that either an incident light meter, spot meter or reflected light meter with 7-10 degree attachment, such as the redoubtable Lunasix or Minolta III or IV can be useful. Also, despite opinion to the contrary, I have found the limited area readings obtained with my old MR meters both accurate and consistent. The area read by the M6 seems a bit larger. Generally the lighting in such venues tends to remain constant, so taking a few readings here and there and keeping them in mind generally works well. The practice of separately metering each shot seems to have been engendered by the ready ability to do so, created by TTL technology. The need almost seems to have been spawned by the technology, rather than vice-versa. Another issue related to use of the Hexar for available light is the limited effective RF base, compared to the optimal M3. I should look this up, but I believe the magnification is only .6, and the base itself is substantially shorter. Not ideal for focusing the Noctilux or 75 Summilux. Joe Sobel