Why Manual? Why not Aperture or Shutter Priority modes?

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by Rmclain3

OK, so which metering mode do other sports shooters use? I've always used the evaluative metering. Which of the modes is most effective? Evaluative, partial or center weighted? Or is it all subjective?

For sports, I tend to shoot in Av mode (forcing the camera to stay basically wide open. I shoot in center weighted, because I tend to have people tight in the middle of the shot.

I don't use matrix/ evaluative, because I care about the person being right - and as I said, I have them in the middle.

I don't use spot, because the people I'm shooting tend to wear a variety of different coloured and reflective gear (race numbers, white tops, black tops etc) and spot mode could end up anywhere as a result.

I'm mostly shooting triathlon/ running events though , so YMMV

[zepp]

Originally Posted by Gordon

I don't use spot, because the people I'm shooting tend to wear a variety of different coloured and reflective gear (race numbers, white tops, black tops etc) and spot mode could end up anywhere as a result.

I'm mostly shooting triathlon/ running events though , so YMMV

Thats exactly the reason I do shoot in spot meter mode is because of the different brightness levels of the athletes clothing, if thats what I'm metering. That way I know exactly what area I am metering and where it should fall , overexposed or underexposed, on the meter. White clothing - over exposed, Black - underexposed.

As you can see from all the different methods mentioned in this thread, there is no exact right way or wrong way. A meter in a camera isn't all that smart or correct, it's the interpretation by the photographer of it's reading and adjustments to it based on the results desired.

Like I said before, it all boils down to your comfort level with the different modes of your camera and your implementation of them. In the end they are all capable of giving you your desired results. I just so happen to like manual exposure control and spot metering coming from a background of shooting a lot of slides in years past.

-- To each his or her own --

[Wendyp]

Originally Posted by zepp

As for myself, I wouldn't buy a camera without spot metering, ie 20D, because of my usage of that metering mode so often.

Without being able to link the spot metering location to the active focus point, as you can in the 1d series body, it's going to make shooting under rapid changing conditions much more difficult.

Perhaps keep that feature in mind should you buy a new camera in the future.

The lack of a spot meter is why I wouldn't even consider the 20D. When I was using my Nikon D70 I used spot metering way too much to have to do without it. The ultimate would be to have the meter at the focus point, then I could alway meter the face.

[Wendyp]

Originally Posted by Pascal

With evaluative, you are giving the camera too much control. Then again, sometimes that's not so bad :)

I have used spot and evaluative and surprisingly enough in the theater evaluative is an overall better choice. If the spot meter is aimed at an actor's chest, for instance, the chest will usually be darker than the face (esp. if they are wearing dark clothing). Also that actor could be standing in a dark spot of the stage. In this situation, the actor's shirt should be properly exposed, but the face could be on the bright side and the rest of the stage could be way too bright. Shooting in RAW and using evaluative metering and actually checking the histogram and LCD screen for blown highlights and dialing down if needed tends to give me the best results so far. I can bumb up the exposure in post a bit, while masking out the areas that were exposed properly in capture. But if I had spot metered on a dark spot to begin with, the highlights would not be easily recovered. I'm not saying this is the best way, but so far it is the best way I've found. I'm still open to trying a different technique.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by zepp

Thats exactly the reason I do shoot in spot meter mode is because of the different brightness levels of the athletes clothing, if thats what I'm metering. That way I know exactly what area I am metering and where it should fall , overexposed or underexposed, on the meter. White clothing - over exposed, Black - underexposed.

Yup - though when I'm doing this I tend to be shooting people moving towards me at a significant rate, so I can't do any compensation on the fly. Often I'll just use manual in that scenario, but if I'm letting the camera think about it, spot metering doesn't do me any good. As you said later, it really comes down to knowing how the meter works and picking what works for the scenario you are in.

[zepp]

Gordon... Who do shoot TRI's for? Liz?

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by zepp

Gordon... Who do shoot TRI's for? Liz?

Fun mainly. Often for the people I train with. Occasionally as favours for the race organisers. I've spoken to Liz a few times and she's asked me to shoot, but it has never lined up - I usually end up doing the races she covers. I've covered things like the Rogue trail running series, where I was actually running the course and shooting, that sort of thing.

The event style of one photo of every participant doesn't really thrill me that much, so I tend to do things a bit less traditionally (as I'm not doing it for the money)

[zepp]

Originally Posted by Gordon

The event style of one photo of every participant doesn't really thrill me that much

Yep, I hear ya. It's really boring. I haven't done it under those circumstances for years.

I figured though you being in Austin you knew her if not having shot with her before. I've never met her but have spoken with her on the phone a few times long ago....


End of this sidetrack - Thread back on topic