Computer-Mediated Metering

[Tailwagger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 3/20/2022 at 9:03 PM, setuporg said:

With the M11, for the very first time, the light path for metering goes through a CPU while your view goes through the OVF.

 

On 3/22/2022 at 6:52 PM, setuporg said:

The fact is that for the first time we have a film (sensor) that is also a meter.

Not fact, fantasy and completely untrue.

With the M11 the only difference w.r.t. metering is that for the first time you have no alternative but to meter directly off the sensor. With every M previous back to the 240, this methodology was optional for RF users, mandatory for EVF users. There  is nothing new here, this is exactly as it has been since the inception of live view on the M. Those of us who having been shooting in LV over all that time, have reported no such issues.  And for the record, the old sensor undoubtedly went through an ADC that spit out a value read by the CPU so that it could calculate the appropriate shutter speed. Any time differential between the two methods would be down to how fast the A to D can be done by the ADC vs how fast the sensor can spit out its number.  

Now consider.  Every damn mirrorless system on the planet meters off the sensor. Are SL/CL users squawking about anything remotely similar?  No.  And this is easily tested for yourself. Take your current M, no need to have an M11. Go into the menu system, set the value of auto review to permanent or if you prefer as I do, shutter button pressed or just hold for 5 seconds.  Take a shot in LV, while staring at the screen or through the EVF.   Do you notice even the slightest jump in the image?  In 8+ years of shooting, I've never once detected any exposure change whatsoever between what I saw when pressing the release and what gets displayed after it fired.  If the intervening shutter operations and metering readout took any significant time, it certainly would have been seen on the slower processors of the previous generations. As far as I know, this issue has never been raised even in discussions about the abysmal glacially slow M240 EVF implementation.  I'm sure if you could measure the two states down to the picolumen there'd be some fluctuation, but anyone that thinks this is even the slightest problem needs to spend less time here and more time in therapy.  If something has actually been observed on the M11... and I shoot almost exclusively in LV and have not, then it's an M11 bug, not an inherent characteristic of the methodology. 

Now in the meantime, what every one has encountered in terms of metering problems is that the accuracy of this now supposedly superior shutter reflection methodology is highly compromised in all sorts of scenarios.  Something that has tripped up any number of unaware shooters and has been the subject of complaint and frustration for years.  So what the hell is more important? Eliminating a few extra milliseconds of theoretical time skew or getting more accurate and consistent exposures, not to mention the option for spot, multi and perhaps at some point highlight protection metering all of which RF purists have been denied over the years unless they were willing to shoot in LV and suffer the rear display being on. 

Edited March 26, 2022 by Tailwagger

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Tailwagger]

8 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Do you notice even the slightest jump in the image? 

...and yes with any of these cameras there are varying degrees of blackout time, but assuming you can retain what you saw at shutter release, you will see nothing altered noticeably when the time the final image is displayed. 

[phototrope]

On 3/22/2022 at 12:44 AM, Photoworks said:

that is how fake news start. oh boy!🤦‍♂️

Arnchair photography, without a camera.