I don't really care about battery independence. I can't hear worth a darn without batteries, but that's ok too. I figure AE is the main reason to have a meter in the camera. As with any other meter, one just needs to learn how to use it intelligently. 
wintoid
Back to film
If I'm not mistaken, rfs with AE still give you control of the exposure right? At first I thought of the same thing but then I realised I bought a fully manual rf because I know it will serve me well for decades. As for AE rfs, I'm not so sure about the electronics inside
Yes, you're right. Let me rephrase then. The manual exposure method puts me in control, on my terms. AE can give me the same control, but my starting point is a decision that has been made 50% by me and 50% by the camera. This is personal, and is in no way a diss on AE. I was using aperture exposure only until very recently, and would have said that manual exposure was a waste of time. Manual exposure has been an epiphany for me. I've seen the light!
literiter
Well-known
My Nikon F3HP is my only "good" camera that has AE. I just realized that that is it. All my other stuff, Nikon F2, M4-P, M2, Hasselblad stuff, Rolleis, etc. require at least manual settings. (Yes, I have a little digital doohickybob with the whole thing, but I rarely use it.)
And, yes,..... I do like AE on occasion.
And, yes,..... I do like AE on occasion.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
I don't miss it when I don't have it and rarely use it when I do.
I like having a meter because I know how to use it to get the results I like but as far as aperture priority goes I like the way I read the light more. (And that's just my personal taste)
I like having a meter because I know how to use it to get the results I like but as far as aperture priority goes I like the way I read the light more. (And that's just my personal taste)
tkluck
Well-known
A match needle meter in the finder is a convenience, but I can live without it, and often do. As for totally automatic exposure, I've never had a camera with AE that I liked. Had batteries crap out far too often over the years. Carrying spare batteries is all well and good but it is annoying to fish them out and usually awkward to change them. And the bloody things are expensive. I've gone to a back up because of dead batteries more than any other reason.
I have a freshly CLA'd OM-2 that I've forced myself to use mainly because the CLA was so expensive. Compared to my OM-1 (comparing apples to apples here) I find that I take better pictures with the OM-1. Bottom line, at least for me.
I have a freshly CLA'd OM-2 that I've forced myself to use mainly because the CLA was so expensive. Compared to my OM-1 (comparing apples to apples here) I find that I take better pictures with the OM-1. Bottom line, at least for me.
Matthew Allen
Well-known
I don't really see why people would dislike AE - it doesn't actually limit you in any way except on cameras with inadequate controls. I've used fully manual, metered manual and AE (mainly aperture priority) with various bodies and in all cases I think about the exposure and adjust it according to the situation.
I'm not sure about this but perhaps the ideal setup (for negatives) would be aperture priority AE with a good spot meter. Maybe I need an OM...
Matthew
I'm not sure about this but perhaps the ideal setup (for negatives) would be aperture priority AE with a good spot meter. Maybe I need an OM...
Matthew
Nh3
Well-known
All in camera meters are for reflected light, if you want incident light a meter is a must.
maddoc
... likes film again.
Same here, I actually bought the Hexar RF for having AE. The exposure is almost always spot-on.
That ZM 18 Distagon you mention is tempting ...
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Deapending on the situation I will use it or not. Generally in town I use it, out in the woods I do not.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I like aperture priority. 95% of the time I just want to get a decent exposure and care mostly about composing. The other 5%, I just turn it off (or, if it's an AE-only camera, switch cameras).
Bnack
Established
For me it just kinda depends on whether I'm shooting something that will wait for me or not. What I works really well for me is light meter needle for manual metering because at no point does the camera tell me that I'm at the "perfect" exposure. This way I always have to think about the lighting in the frame. But in a perfect world we'd all bracket everything at least 3 ways, in which case as long as the meter gets us close, we should be in good shape.
Robin P
Well-known
I'm happy with LED "traffic light" manual metering such as you get on the CV Bessas , or auto exposure with a needle indicator and a half depression of the shutter button to hold such as you get with old Konicas. What I find inconvenient is a camera with no meter or auto exposure with no "hold".
Cheers, Robin
Cheers, Robin
Chris101
summicronia
Sometimes I use AE, and others I don't. I guess it depends on what camera I am using. So I went with 'Don't Care'. The smiley in that choice helped too.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I paticularly like my OM-2 in AE mode ... the camera has a very accurate meter and a large easy to see compensation dial. A quick evaluation of the scene ... quickly decide if compensation is needed and shoot.
usagisakana
Established
I use a himatic without the metering, as its meter is way too innacurate. I use a handheld incident meter currently, that works for me, but it is irritating at times to constantly take readings and change settings.. as most of the time the difference between sunlight and shade varies between 2-3 stops.. and I end up with underexposed negs if I don't compensate for the shade. I am currently unsure as to whether I should save my money for a M6 or a ZI... both have meters but the ability to use AE would be handy at times.
hiorgos
Established
I like the AE on my zeiss ikon, very much.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
I'm using a handheld, mostly in incident mode, but i would love to have a proper ttl meter in my m2 or in the big brother the fuji 6x9.
Just to check exposure once in a while.
I can't afford a newer version of these that would have such a meter. All the m7, mp etc talk is a distant gibberish for me
Just to check exposure once in a while.
I can't afford a newer version of these that would have such a meter. All the m7, mp etc talk is a distant gibberish for me
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
On the other hand, call me a snapshooter, but i like sometimes to just load my yashica GSN and not worry about exposure at all.
I know, of course, whether i have a chance for reasonable shutter speeds with that film in that light or not, but i could not care less about the details.
And it rarely lets me down.
I know, of course, whether i have a chance for reasonable shutter speeds with that film in that light or not, but i could not care less about the details.
And it rarely lets me down.
sanmich
Veteran
One thing is VERY useful just between metered manual exposure and AE.
It's the ability to point the camera at a subject without bringing it up to the eye, measure light having a reading on the top of the camera, set the camera, then take the camera to your eye, focus and shoot.
Nikon F and F2 has it,
Leica M2/3/4 with leicameter has it.
IMHO, a shame that new cameras don't offer this, although I can understand the design ugliness factor (an MP with leds on top EEEEK!!)
It's the ability to point the camera at a subject without bringing it up to the eye, measure light having a reading on the top of the camera, set the camera, then take the camera to your eye, focus and shoot.
Nikon F and F2 has it,
Leica M2/3/4 with leicameter has it.
IMHO, a shame that new cameras don't offer this, although I can understand the design ugliness factor (an MP with leds on top EEEEK!!)
Avotius
Some guy
I use AE all the time, in fact just because my m6 does not have it I have seriously considered selling it, also because I could use the cash, but besides that, AE is very important to my style of photography.