Re: Nikon D90 defective Matrix metering

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Doug Jewell, Mar 28, 2009.

  1. Doug Jewell

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Gemini wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Focus" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31436871
    >>
    >> I was looking over the reactions as some folks seem to think that it's
    >> OK for Nikon to over expose in MM. But is it really?
    >>
    >> Here what they promise in their advertisement about the D90:
    >>
    >>
    >> "Nikon 3D Color Matrix Metering II with Scene Recognition System:
    >> Nikon's renowned 420-pixel RGB 3D Color Matrix Metering II, teamed
    >> with the exclusive Scene Recognition System, evaluates images,
    >> referencing an on-board database of over 30,000 photographic scenes,
    >> for unmatched exposure accuracy."
    >>
    >> A database of 30.000 photos? None of them had a clear, sunny sky in them?
    >>
    >>
    >> That hardly sounds like a camera that would blow out skies like a P&S
    >> shooter, does it?
    >>
    >> So, Nikon: explain yourself.
    >>
    >> --
    >> ---
    >> Focus
    >>

    >
    > I don't know what you are doing wrong Focus but both my D90s are spot on
    > with exposure.

    When I was selling cameras, it was a very common scenario
    that people would bring back Nikon cameras (D40, 50, 70, 80,
    90) claiming the exposure was faulty because they were
    getting white skies.

    There were 2 ways to correct it and get exposures that one
    would consider normal - use centre-weighted average, and
    take a reading with the horizon exactly in the middle of the
    frame, or on matrix use minus 1 to minus 2 EC.

    The matrix metering put far too much emphasis on the land
    part of a landscape, and would blow the sky every time. In
    fact I would call the land part over-exposed too - medium
    greens became insipid yellow greens etc. As you say, the
    database of 30,000 images obviously didn't include a sunny
    landscape scene.

    To be fair to Nikon, my own Canon 450D & Samsung GX10 also
    overexpose landscape scenes when on their equivalents of
    matrix metering - although not as severe as the Nikon. The
    Canon & Samsung give washed out but still blue skies, and
    only need -1/3 to -2/3 EC to get acceptable results.

    --
    Have you ever noticed that all legal documents need to be
    completed in black or blue pen, but we vote in pencil?
     
    Doug Jewell, Mar 28, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Doug Jewell

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Ockham's Razor wrote:
    > In article <49ce8cfc$>,
    > "Gemini" <> wrote:
    >
    >> "Focus" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31436871
    >>>
    >>> I was looking over the reactions as some folks seem to think that it's OK
    >>> for Nikon to over expose in MM. But is it really?
    >>>
    >>> Here what they promise in their advertisement about the D90:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Nikon 3D Color Matrix Metering II with Scene Recognition System: Nikon's
    >>> renowned 420-pixel RGB 3D Color Matrix Metering II, teamed with the
    >>> exclusive Scene Recognition System, evaluates images, referencing an
    >>> on-board database of over 30,000 photographic scenes, for unmatched
    >>> exposure accuracy."
    >>>
    >>> A database of 30.000 photos? None of them had a clear, sunny sky in them?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> That hardly sounds like a camera that would blow out skies like a P&S
    >>> shooter, does it?
    >>>
    >>> So, Nikon: explain yourself.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> ---
    >>> Focus
    >>>

    >> I don't know what you are doing wrong Focus but both my D90s are spot on
    >> with exposure.

    >
    > Sounds like he needs a polarizing filter. Nikon sells them also.

    Not really - polarisers are not a cure-all for skies. They
    only make a significant difference when you are shooting
    with the sun at a 3 oclock or 9 oclock position relative to
    you and the camera. With the sun directly behind you they
    make practically no difference whatsoever. In the middle of
    an Australian summer with the sun near directly overhead
    they also have minimal impact (although your best
    photography times come later or earlier in the day, when the
    polariser will work better). I have witnessed the Nikon
    overexposure issue, and I doubt a polariser would make much
    of an improvement.

    --
    Have you ever noticed that all legal documents need to be
    completed in black or blue pen, but we vote in pencil?
     
    Doug Jewell, Mar 28, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Doug Jewell

    PDM Guest

    Seen a couple of reviews that say the D90 can overexpose. Just be thankfull
    you haven't got a D40/40x. They expose like hell on MM, but not so bad on
    CW. Just got a D90 myself and, yes, it does overexpose a little, but this
    can be finely adjusted in a menu so I'm led to believe. One day I'll find
    it.

    PDM


    "Gemini" <> wrote in message
    news:49ce8cfc$...
    >
    >
    > "Focus" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31436871
    >>
    >> I was looking over the reactions as some folks seem to think that it's OK
    >> for Nikon to over expose in MM. But is it really?
    >>
    >> Here what they promise in their advertisement about the D90:
    >>
    >>
    >> "Nikon 3D Color Matrix Metering II with Scene Recognition System: Nikon's
    >> renowned 420-pixel RGB 3D Color Matrix Metering II, teamed with the
    >> exclusive Scene Recognition System, evaluates images, referencing an
    >> on-board database of over 30,000 photographic scenes, for unmatched
    >> exposure accuracy."
    >>
    >> A database of 30.000 photos? None of them had a clear, sunny sky in them?
    >>
    >>
    >> That hardly sounds like a camera that would blow out skies like a P&S
    >> shooter, does it?
    >>
    >> So, Nikon: explain yourself.
    >>
    >> --
    >> ---
    >> Focus
    >>

    >
    > I don't know what you are doing wrong Focus but both my D90s are spot on
    > with exposure.
     
    PDM, Mar 28, 2009
    #3
  4. Doug Jewell

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Doug Jewell wrote:
    > Ockham's Razor wrote:
    >> In article <49ce8cfc$>,
    >> "Gemini" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Focus" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31436871
    >>>>
    >>>> I was looking over the reactions as some folks seem to think that
    >>>> it's OK for Nikon to over expose in MM. But is it really?
    >>>>
    >>>> Here what they promise in their advertisement about the D90:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Nikon 3D Color Matrix Metering II with Scene Recognition System:
    >>>> Nikon's renowned 420-pixel RGB 3D Color Matrix Metering II, teamed
    >>>> with the exclusive Scene Recognition System, evaluates images,
    >>>> referencing an on-board database of over 30,000 photographic scenes,
    >>>> for unmatched exposure accuracy."
    >>>>
    >>>> A database of 30.000 photos? None of them had a clear, sunny sky in
    >>>> them?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> That hardly sounds like a camera that would blow out skies like a
    >>>> P&S shooter, does it?
    >>>>
    >>>> So, Nikon: explain yourself.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> ---
    >>>> Focus
    >>>>
    >>> I don't know what you are doing wrong Focus but both my D90s are spot
    >>> on with exposure.

    >>
    >> Sounds like he needs a polarizing filter. Nikon sells them also.

    > Not really - polarisers are not a cure-all for skies. They only make a
    > significant difference when you are shooting with the sun at a 3 oclock
    > or 9 oclock position relative to you and the camera. With the sun
    > directly behind you they make practically no difference whatsoever. In
    > the middle of an Australian summer with the sun near directly overhead
    > they also have minimal impact (although your best photography times come
    > later or earlier in the day, when the polariser will work better). I
    > have witnessed the Nikon overexposure issue, and I doubt a polariser
    > would make much of an improvement.
    >


    While your overall point is correct, I would argue the details there..

    Yes, polarisers work best at 3:00 and 9:00, ie when the sun is at 90
    degrees to the direction you are pointing the camera. *But* that means
    when the sun is directly overhead, the polariser will work best on the
    sky near the horizon. Ie, where you are normally pointing the camera..
    Yes, the effect gradually fades as you go upwards..

    But to say that a polariser has 'minimal' impact at midday, is to miss
    the time when it is actually *very* useful.
     
    Mark Thomas, Mar 29, 2009
    #4
  5. PDM wrote:
    > Seen a couple of reviews that say the D90 can overexpose. Just be
    > thankfull you haven't got a D40/40x. They expose like hell on MM, but
    > not so bad on CW. Just got a D90 myself and, yes, it does overexpose
    > a little, but this can be finely adjusted in a menu so I'm led to
    > believe. One day I'll find it.
    >
    > PDM


    I've found that use a fixed -1/3 stop exposure compensation produces
    images exposed in the way I prefer, on the Nikon D40, D60 and a Panasonic
    TZ3. Perhaps if I took raw I would not need to do this.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Mar 29, 2009
    #5
  6. Doug Jewell

    PDM Guest

    <snip>
    > I've found that use a fixed -1/3 stop exposure compensation produces
    > images exposed in the way I prefer, on the Nikon D40, D60 and a Panasonic
    > TZ3. Perhaps if I took raw I would not need to do this.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David

    Unfortunately, setting it to -1/3 doesn't work for all shots. It's because
    Nikon set the meter to expose for the shadows instead of the highlights.
    This was done to please the newby so the out of the camera shots appeared
    more vibrant. I get round it by reverting to my old Weston Master V meter
    with Invercone coupled with manual. Same way I used to shoot for calenders
    with 2 1/4 square transparancy film way back in the 1970s/80s. Works well
    when the light is not so variable.

    Changing to RAW would give you better heardroom, about a stop or even more
    perhaps.

    PDM
     
    PDM, Mar 29, 2009
    #6
  7. PDM wrote:
    > <snip>
    >> I've found that use a fixed -1/3 stop exposure compensation produces
    >> images exposed in the way I prefer, on the Nikon D40, D60 and a
    >> Panasonic TZ3. Perhaps if I took raw I would not need to do this.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> David

    > Unfortunately, setting it to -1/3 doesn't work for all shots. It's
    > because Nikon set the meter to expose for the shadows instead of the
    > highlights. This was done to please the newby so the out of the
    > camera shots appeared more vibrant. I get round it by reverting to my
    > old Weston Master V meter with Invercone coupled with manual. Same
    > way I used to shoot for calenders with 2 1/4 square transparancy film
    > way back in the 1970s/80s. Works well when the light is not so
    > variable.
    > Changing to RAW would give you better heardroom, about a stop or even
    > more perhaps.
    >
    > PDM


    As with any tool, you can get better results by knowing how to use a
    camera to its best. I find that a quick glance at the LCD after taking
    the picture is a useful quick check, and use the histogram if I am in
    doubt. Having recently been in the Antarctic with quite a lot of bright
    ice and snow, getting the right exposure required a little more care than
    normal.

    Other than that, I've found the Nikon metering to work very well for me.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Mar 29, 2009
    #7
  8. Doug Jewell

    Gemini Guest

    "Focus" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31436871
    >
    > I was looking over the reactions as some folks seem to think that it's OK
    > for Nikon to over expose in MM. But is it really?
    >
    > Here what they promise in their advertisement about the D90:
    >
    >
    > "Nikon 3D Color Matrix Metering II with Scene Recognition System: Nikon's
    > renowned 420-pixel RGB 3D Color Matrix Metering II, teamed with the
    > exclusive Scene Recognition System, evaluates images, referencing an
    > on-board database of over 30,000 photographic scenes, for unmatched
    > exposure accuracy."
    >
    > A database of 30.000 photos? None of them had a clear, sunny sky in them?
    >
    >
    > That hardly sounds like a camera that would blow out skies like a P&S
    > shooter, does it?
    >
    > So, Nikon: explain yourself.
    >
    > --
    > ---
    > Focus
    >


    I don't know what you are doing wrong Focus but both my D90s are spot on
    with exposure.
     
    Gemini, Mar 29, 2009
    #8
  9. Doug Jewell

    PDM Guest

    <snip>
    >
    > As with any tool, you can get better results by knowing how to use a
    > camera to its best. I find that a quick glance at the LCD after taking
    > the picture is a useful quick check, and use the histogram if I am in
    > doubt. Having recently been in the Antarctic with quite a lot of bright
    > ice and snow, getting the right exposure required a little more care than
    > normal.
    >
    > Other than that, I've found the Nikon metering to work very well for me.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David

    I too look at the LCD and usually have either the histagram on show or the
    highlight warning. But have you noticed that that fantastic grab shot you
    just made is always over exposed and by the time you have compensated it's
    too late.

    Just compared my Westen Meter with the D90. exactly the same in most
    lighting. Occasionally over exposes but most is recoverable in NX2. So I'm
    guessing that I won't have anywhere near the same problems I have with the
    D40x.

    PDM
     
    PDM, Mar 29, 2009
    #9
  10. PDM wrote:
    []
    > I too look at the LCD and usually have either the histagram on show
    > or the highlight warning. But have you noticed that that fantastic
    > grab shot you just made is always over exposed and by the time you
    > have compensated it's too late.


    Well, no. I keep -1/3 compensation on the D40 and D60, and find that the
    great majority of the shots are just fine. When taking a shot, I try and
    ensure that the exposure is made with a reasonable mixture of highlights
    and lowlights being covered. I might typically expose with one view and
    move the camera slightly for taking, just like I did with colour slide
    film. Not required for all shots, of course, just where you have
    extremes of lighting.

    > Just compared my Westen Meter with the D90. exactly the same in most
    > lighting. Occasionally over exposes but most is recoverable in NX2.
    > So I'm guessing that I won't have anywhere near the same problems I
    > have with the D40x.
    >
    > PDM


    Perhaps you need to send your D90 back for adjustment?

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Mar 30, 2009
    #10
  11. Doug Jewell

    PDM Guest

    <snip.
    > Perhaps you need to send your D90 back for adjustment?
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David

    I've had it 4 days; give me a chance.

    PDM
     
    PDM, Mar 30, 2009
    #11
  12. Doug Jewell

    Paul Furman Guest

    Focus wrote:
    > "Doug Jewell" <> wrote in message
    > news:49ceb01b$0$29863$...
    >> Gemini wrote:
    >>>
    >>> "Focus" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31436871
    >>>>
    >>>> I was looking over the reactions as some folks seem to think that it's
    >>>> OK for Nikon to over expose in MM. But is it really?
    >>>>
    >>>> Here what they promise in their advertisement about the D90:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Nikon 3D Color Matrix Metering II with Scene Recognition System:
    >>>> Nikon's renowned 420-pixel RGB 3D Color Matrix Metering II, teamed with
    >>>> the exclusive Scene Recognition System, evaluates images, referencing an
    >>>> on-board database of over 30,000 photographic scenes, for unmatched
    >>>> exposure accuracy."
    >>>>
    >>>> A database of 30.000 photos? None of them had a clear, sunny sky in
    >>>> them?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> That hardly sounds like a camera that would blow out skies like a P&S
    >>>> shooter, does it?
    >>>>
    >>>> So, Nikon: explain yourself.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> ---
    >>>> Focus
    >>>>
    >>> I don't know what you are doing wrong Focus but both my D90s are spot on
    >>> with exposure.

    >> When I was selling cameras, it was a very common scenario that people
    >> would bring back Nikon cameras (D40, 50, 70, 80, 90) claiming the exposure
    >> was faulty because they were getting white skies.
    >>
    >> There were 2 ways to correct it and get exposures that one would consider
    >> normal - use centre-weighted average, and take a reading with the horizon
    >> exactly in the middle of the frame, or on matrix use minus 1 to minus 2
    >> EC.
    >>
    >> The matrix metering put far too much emphasis on the land part of a
    >> landscape, and would blow the sky every time. In fact I would call the
    >> land part over-exposed too - medium greens became insipid yellow greens
    >> etc. As you say, the database of 30,000 images obviously didn't include a
    >> sunny landscape scene.
    >>
    >> To be fair to Nikon, my own Canon 450D & Samsung GX10 also overexpose
    >> landscape scenes when on their equivalents of matrix metering - although
    >> not as severe as the Nikon. The Canon & Samsung give washed out but still
    >> blue skies, and only need -1/3 to -2/3 EC to get acceptable results.
    >>

    >
    > Thanks for sharing that.
    > Nobody can make a point better than someone who sells or sold camera's,
    > because you're at the receiving end of the problem car.
    > I had other camera's as well, like the D300 (much better with MM)


    Perhaps the D90 is tuned for snapshooters who want to expose for the
    people in the center of the frame rather than the sky?


    > and even
    > the cheaper Sony 350 was much better at their version of MM. I would still
    > have that camera if:
    > 1. the noise wasn't so terrible and
    > 2. if the flash wouldn't close peoples eyes
    >
    > The tilting screen for liveview is a blessing in a lot of situations and
    > much under estimated by pro's. It also sports a liveview histogram that's
    > very accurate and helpfull in decision making.
    >



    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Apr 5, 2009
    #12
  13. Doug Jewell

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 20:38:28 +0100, Focus wrote:

    >> Perhaps the D90 is tuned for snapshooters who want to expose for the
    >> people in the center of the frame rather than the sky?

    >
    >
    > I would assume that's what center weight is for.
    > Otherwise Nikon should call it "center people happy faces with blown sky
    > mode" and not "3D color matrix II with database of over 30.000 pictures
    > mode"
    > Anyway it's stupid of them not to have matched the D300's MM, because a lot
    > of pro's might concider taking a D90 as a backup, due to the fact that it's
    > also 12 MP and has a lot in common.


    It's not wise for those that lack a good understanding of the many
    things Nikon to make accusations of stupidity. There are too many
    differences between the D300 and D90 (other than exposure modes) to
    qualify the D90 as an acceptable backup camera, unless money (or the
    photographer) is really tight.
     
    ASAAR, Apr 5, 2009
    #13
  14. Doug Jewell

    PDM Guest

    "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 20:38:28 +0100, Focus wrote:
    >
    >>> Perhaps the D90 is tuned for snapshooters who want to expose for the
    >>> people in the center of the frame rather than the sky?

    >>
    >>
    >> I would assume that's what center weight is for.
    >> Otherwise Nikon should call it "center people happy faces with blown sky
    >> mode" and not "3D color matrix II with database of over 30.000 pictures
    >> mode"
    >> Anyway it's stupid of them not to have matched the D300's MM, because a
    >> lot
    >> of pro's might concider taking a D90 as a backup, due to the fact that
    >> it's
    >> also 12 MP and has a lot in common.

    >
    > It's not wise for those that lack a good understanding of the many
    > things Nikon to make accusations of stupidity. There are too many
    > differences between the D300 and D90 (other than exposure modes) to
    > qualify the D90 as an acceptable backup camera, unless money (or the
    > photographer) is really tight.


    Acording to Nikon a lot of newspapers (in the UK) are giving the D90 to
    their staff photgraphers as they can use it to record movies for their
    websites at the same time as taking still for the actual paper.
    PDM
     
    PDM, Apr 6, 2009
    #14
  15. Doug Jewell

    PDM Guest

    "Focus" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 20:38:28 +0100, Focus wrote:
    >>
    >>>> Perhaps the D90 is tuned for snapshooters who want to expose for the
    >>>> people in the center of the frame rather than the sky?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I would assume that's what center weight is for.
    >>> Otherwise Nikon should call it "center people happy faces with blown sky
    >>> mode" and not "3D color matrix II with database of over 30.000 pictures
    >>> mode"
    >>> Anyway it's stupid of them not to have matched the D300's MM, because a
    >>> lot
    >>> of pro's might concider taking a D90 as a backup, due to the fact that
    >>> it's
    >>> also 12 MP and has a lot in common.

    >>
    >> It's not wise for those that lack a good understanding of the many
    >> things Nikon to make accusations of stupidity. There are too many
    >> differences between the D300 and D90 (other than exposure modes) to
    >> qualify the D90 as an acceptable backup camera, unless money (or the
    >> photographer) is really tight.

    >
    >
    > So you think making a MM worse than a cheaper D40, D40x or D60 is a wise
    > decision?
    >
    > --
    > ---

    MM mode better than on the D40x. I've got a D90 and
    a D40x, and I can assure you that the metering is even worse on the D40x.
    The D90 may overexpose, but it is more predicable and consistant compared
    to the D40x. This, along with D40/D60 is terrible, is completely
    unpredictable. You end up having to constantly adjust the thing.
    If only owners would e-mail/write/phone Nikon and complain.
    PDM
     
    PDM, Apr 6, 2009
    #15
  16. Doug Jewell

    ASAAR Guest

    On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 14:30:43 +0100, Focus wrote:

    >> It's not wise for those that lack a good understanding of the many
    >> things Nikon to make accusations of stupidity. There are too many
    >> differences between the D300 and D90 (other than exposure modes) to
    >> qualify the D90 as an acceptable backup camera, unless money (or the
    >> photographer) is really tight.

    >
    >
    > So you think making a MM worse than a cheaper D40, D40x or D60
    > is a wise decision?


    Prejudging a bit here, aren't you? Many D300 users don't share
    your opinion. Users of all cameras have to deal with learning
    curves, and it should be assumed that the D300's will be steeper
    than that of the D40/D60. Those that master the D300's toolset will
    be able to get better results than if they chose to use an entry
    level DSLR instead. Different doesn't mean worse, except for those
    that don't want to, or can't take the time to learn to use their
    cameras well. If you're less pleased with the D300, by all means
    sell it and switch to a D40 or D60, or maybe to another Sony.

    Or you could try to see what others have to say about the D300's
    Matrix Metering. Here's one example :

    > Metering has changed on the D300, as has autofocus, and the two
    > are now having relations together. Yes, we still have the same
    > 1005-pixel CCD in the viewfinder doing the metering, though its
    > position has changed (still vulnerable to light coming through the
    > viewfinder, by the way) and it's now linked in real time to the AF
    > system. The critical change comes for matrix meter users: the D300
    > pays more attention to what's under the autofocus sensor being used
    > than the D200 did. Enough so that you need to pay closer attention
    > to your histograms. Some have said that the D300 exposes "hotter"
    > than the D200, but that's not actually true in my experience. Nikon
    > has changed the mid-tone gamma at the default settings, which gives
    > the appearance of brighter images, but in a stable, moderate contrast
    > scene with something neutral under the AF sensor, both my D200
    > and D300 give the same exposure. But be careful if you've got bright
    > or dark objects under the focus point--you'll get more variation of
    > the metering in such cases than the D200 gave.
    > . . .
    >
    > Not only does the D300's focus system track as well as any previous
    > Nikon system, it also has tricks up its sleeve that make it better--far
    > better--than the D200's. First is the size of the area covered by the
    > focus system: it's enormous compared to the D200. You have to be
    > framing very off center to not have a sensor on your subject. Second,
    > in the Auto Area AF mode (and 3D tracking mode) the AF sensor
    > and matrix meter get together in interesting and useful ways. The
    > system works unusually well on anything that has a flesh tone in it,
    > even if the subject moves off the autofocus sensors. There's some
    > serious computational stuff going on in the focus system now, and it
    > has more "magic" than before. On the other hand, magic isn't
    > foolproof, so when the system flops, it flops. I'll repeat what I said
    > before: spend time studying your options. With practice you'll start
    > to understand the situations where the magic won't happen and
    > where you need to step in with a different AF choice. Once you get
    > to that level of understanding, you'll have no problems at all with
    > the system. But it is enough different than anything that came before
    > it that you must spend time learning it.


    And similarly, learn to recognize situations where you might not
    want to use the D300's matrix metering. You don't think the
    D40/D60's M-M is foolproof, do you?

    I do get the strong feeling that what would suit you best is a
    camera that could be described as a P&S DSLR. Maybe you should
    consider using Fuji's S100fs. But if you do, it's almost certain
    that you'll be complaining about *many* stupid Fuji decisions. :)
     
    ASAAR, Apr 6, 2009
    #16
  17. Doug Jewell

    ASAAR Guest

    On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 12:55:10 +0100, "PDM"
    <pdcm99[deletethisbit]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

    >> It's not wise for those that lack a good understanding of the many
    >> things Nikon to make accusations of stupidity. There are too many
    >> differences between the D300 and D90 (other than exposure modes) to
    >> qualify the D90 as an acceptable backup camera, unless money (or the
    >> photographer) is really tight.

    >
    > Acording to Nikon a lot of newspapers (in the UK) are giving the D90 to
    > their staff photgraphers as they can use it to record movies for their
    > websites at the same time as taking still for the actual paper.
    > PDM


    That's a reasonable thing to do from the newspaper's
    bean-counter's point of view, but it's not quite the same as
    choosing the D90 as a D300 backup. It may also be an unwise
    decision as shooting good videos isn't necessarily what most good
    still photographers are capable of doing. It may also overload many
    of them, interfering with what they do best.
     
    ASAAR, Apr 6, 2009
    #17
  18. Doug Jewell

    PDM Guest

    "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 12:55:10 +0100, "PDM"
    > <pdcm99[deletethisbit]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >>> It's not wise for those that lack a good understanding of the many
    >>> things Nikon to make accusations of stupidity. There are too many
    >>> differences between the D300 and D90 (other than exposure modes) to
    >>> qualify the D90 as an acceptable backup camera, unless money (or the
    >>> photographer) is really tight.

    >>
    >> Acording to Nikon a lot of newspapers (in the UK) are giving the D90 to
    >> their staff photgraphers as they can use it to record movies for their
    >> websites at the same time as taking still for the actual paper.
    >> PDM

    >
    > That's a reasonable thing to do from the newspaper's
    > bean-counter's point of view, but it's not quite the same as
    > choosing the D90 as a D300 backup. It may also be an unwise
    > decision as shooting good videos isn't necessarily what most good
    > still photographers are capable of doing. It may also overload many
    > of them, interfering with what they do best.


    But it's what newspapers expect from there staff these days.
    PDM
     
    PDM, Apr 7, 2009
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Cliff Spicer

    S2Pro and Matrix Metering with Flash

    Cliff Spicer, Jul 22, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    366
    Cliff Spicer
    Jul 22, 2003
  2. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    470
    [BnH]
    Oct 26, 2005
  3. Rob Morley

    Re: Nikon D90 defective Matrix metering

    Rob Morley, Apr 7, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    619
    Paul Furman
    Apr 28, 2009
  4. Doug Jewell

    Re: Nikon D90 defective Matrix metering

    Doug Jewell, Apr 8, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    3,051
    Bruce
    Apr 12, 2009
  5. eNo

    Nikon Matrix metering idiosyncracies

    eNo, Aug 6, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    726
    DEvON
    Aug 8, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page