[Leica] Canon Anything vs. DMR

[scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin)]

Ok, I like shooting my D70. That said, the quote below just makes
me think that these wunder-cameras are maybe too clever. Takes a
PhD and a direct hotline to the cameras' engineers to figure out what
the hell they are doing.

I'm a bit of a newb, but I read about photogs freaking out when Kodak
or whoever changed the emulsion formula or a paper right out from
under their feet. I can understand. I did just read a post from  a 
thoughful
inkjet printer who complained that Moab Kayenta was changed without
warning, screwing up a whole print workflow (this one I could print myself
and see with my own eyes).

I wonder if this digital technology will ever be refined and beaten down
to simple, understandable deterministic behavior - ISO, Aperture, Shutter,
Focus - shoot?   Already, it seems that ISO isn't always ISO, with my
Sekonic flashmeter usually delivering more exposure than my D70 sensor
actually wants (confirmed by a few other shooters as well). Will we need
new (pricey) flash meters with special modes that chase the latest sensor
responses?

I've a software development background, and I know that often it takes
alot of engineering to make the front end straightforward. Not a great 
example,
but with Word you can turn of the reveal codes and grammar checking and
just type.

There's something to be said for simple gear that performs more or less
consistently year on year. I guess that's not news to Leica forum folk :-)

Oh, well, rant off.

Scott

David Teo wrote:

> Hi
>
> Well, it's not the 20D's fault that you couldn't capture that bee - if 
> you have used Canon's AF macro lenses, you probably would have no 
> metering problems :)
>
> As for the metering problem, Canon's chuck westfall had this to say, 
> which you might find it useful in your work.... (reproduced from this 
> link:
> http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0508/westfall.html )
>
> "The EOS 20D focusing screen is optimized for superior brightness at 
> moderate apertures from about f/3.5 and smaller, compared to 
> conventional ground glass designs. This makes the viewfinder image 
> brighter and easier to focus manually at those moderate apertures, but 
> the trade-off is that it passes disproportionately more light to the 
> metering system. When a Canon EF lens is mounted to an EOS camera, a 
> variable exposure compensation factor (a program curve, not just a 
> fixed compensation factor) for this phenomenon is fed through the 
> system in order to provide correct metering for all apertures. 
> However, when using a non-coupled manual diaphragm lens as you 
> describe, no such communication takes place, so the responsibility for 
> exposure compensation reverts to you. It's unnecessary to use an 
> external meter. Instead, you can take a series of test shots at the 
> working aperture(s) you plan to use, then analyze the test photos to 
> determine the most desirable exposure compensation factor for each 
> aperture. The 20D's auto exposure bracketing (AEB) function speeds up 
> the process of taking the test photos, and you can use the Info 
> palette in Photoshop to determine the most accurate exposure. If you 
> can standardize on one or two particular apertures you plan to use 
> (for maximum sharpness, desired depth of field, etc.), it will 
> simplify the calibration process by eliminating the need for tests at 
> other apertures."
>