Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/09/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]- --On Sunday, September 22, 2002 9:39 AM -0400 "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> wrote: > As we both know, Rolfe, the flash metering on the Nikons, and the Canons > as well, is far more sophisticated than simple TTL. And as to your > complaint about not wanting the camera to tell you how to balance the > foreground flash and background available light - all the higher-end > cameras and flash units allow for a multitude of adjustments and > balancing acts by the photographer. > > If you're happy with simple TTL flash, that's fine. But don't suggest that > it is what it isn't.:-) There is no question that the TTL flash metering on Nikon and Canon is good, but apart from applying the matrix metering algorithms versus Leica's averaging flash metering, what exactly are the differences in TTL *metering*? As I suggested in another post, the "sophistication" that the Canon and Nikon flash systems get comes, IMHO, mainly from the dedicated flash and dedicated wireless controllers, not from the camera itself. To clarify my metering comment, here is my point: If I go to all the trouble of using a sophisticated wireless multiple-TTL setup, it is because I want to accurately control foreground/background ratios, etc. I don't then want some matrix metering algorithm to *reinterpret* my intentions; instead I probably actually want an averaging flash metering system which is what Leica uses. - -- Rolfe Tessem rolfe@ldp.com Lucky Duck Productions, Inc. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html