Hey Aram, thanks for the heads up on how to test this EOS Alien Lens Meter 'Feature/Failure' myself. Frankly now you describe it, the test seems obvious, but quite glad I have it in hand now. I'll give it a run through - with luck - this weekend. I really chalk this metering 'feature' into the same category as the 'failings' inherent in a Center Weighted Metering System. There are scenes and content which it will simply fail at metering well, plain fact of life which has to be accepted with all that it does do well, so a photographer learns to use the meter as a tool. eg: what it does well, what it doesn't, and how to leverage it's failings to get the readings a photographer needs to express themself well with Photographically. (I'm assuming everyone knows how center weighted camera meters work and where they fail as I make this argument - if not - speak up!). Maybe a better argument would be the rather different metering needs of shooting with Positive Film (Slides & Polaroids) as opposed to what is needed with Negative films (no parenthetical needed I hope!). EG expose for Highlights with the former, expose for shadows for the latter. Not 'always' a rule to follow, but in the vicinity of universal in my opinion. Learn what one needs to do with one's equipment (in this case it's meter) in order to get the exposures one needs to get a good image. Richard in Snow Dusted Michigan ________________________________ There are 10 kinds of people in the world - those who understand binary and those who don't! _________ Nothing is really work unless you would rather be doing something else. - James M. Barrie ________________________________ ________________________________ From: Aram Langhans <leica_r8@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 10:42:23 AM Subject: [LRflex] Re: 100 APO - now Canon 5D - now EOS Metering Richard. You say you are using compensation when in automatic exposure mode, so I guess you know the situation does exist. If you are always shooting at some set of f-stops, say 2 stops down, then this will work because you know what to expect. If you want an experiment to see how much the effect is, try this. Set your camera up on some scene and with your manual lens in place, dial in the largest f-stop you have, say f-2. Set your camera to the "A" mode and dial in a neutral compensation (0 +/-). Take the picture. Then, take a series of exposures by stopping the lens down a stop at a time, f-2.8, f-4, f-5.6.... to f-16 or 22 and do not change any settings on the camera. If all was working as logic would dictate, the camera will change the shutter accordingly, say from 1/500 to 1/250, 1/125... to achieve the same exposure. Now, go look at what you've got. On my Rebel, each successive exposure will get more and more underexposed as the meter fails to compensate correctly for the manual lens. Of course, if you do this with an EOS mount lens, all is well. The camera will behave just like logic dictates. Of course, you have some leeway in correcting this problem in RAW mode, but don't. Just look at the images as the camera has captured them. Or shoot JPEG for this test. Try this and let us know how the 20D performs. If you have found a successful way to deal with it, and it sounds like you have your system, then that is just fine. I have found my way to deal with it, too. In lieu of a Leica R-10D, this is the option I choose. I do not want more of a crop factor, so I am not going the Olympus route. I do not want to change my lens mounts at this time since I still will shoot B&W in my R8 for a while, so Nikon is out. So, I deal with it and complain a bit, but the joy of the results with my Leica lenses is my compensation. Aram PS. Lover your "10 kinds of people" signature. ------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/ Archives are at: //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/