Pentax Spotmatic (History trivia)

[philo]

I still have my Spotmatic that I bought in 1970.


For some reason I decided to look it up and saw that it was named such
as it had been designed to make use of a "spot" light meter.

Just prior to production, due to the inability to get spot-metering
working properly, the metering was changed to "average".

However, the name stuck.

[Savageduck]

My 1966 vintage Spotmatic is long gone, but my 1976 K1000 still lives.
< https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/K1000.jpg >

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Scott Schuckert]

In article <knaklh$os3$1...@dont-email.me>, philo <philo@priv cy.not>
wrote:

Basically correct, although it was a marketing decision, not an
engineering one. test users had too much trouble with the spot meter.

At the time, I pored through the documentation trying to figure out
what they were talking about; the distributors rep didn't know.

[philo]

Interesting.

I do recall that when I got mine, though I was a complete novice, the
idea of "spot" metering would not have been hard to understand.

I was aware that the meter took an average reading and soon learned to
compensate if the subject was in brighter light than the surroundings.

We called it "out-guessing" the meter.

[philo]

I still have my camera, but the original 50mm lens is long gone.
I made the mistake of leaving it in an unlocked car.

--
https://www.createspace.com/3707686

[Savageduck]

The faux leather "cardboard" case didn't stand up to the test of time.
It was sort of disappointing to discover that the closest it had even
been to leather was my belt.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Mort]

Hi,

My trusty Olympus OM-4 and OM-4T film cameras have the ability to take
up to 5 spot readings per frame, and then average them. This is very
helpful, e.g. with someone with light skin and dark clothing, or vice
versa. One can, for example, take 1 spot reading from the clothing and
then 2 or 3 from the face, so that the best exposure is gotten for the
most important area. I wish that my digital camera could do that.

Mort Linder

[nospam]

In article <51a007f5$0$25629$607e...@cv.net>, Mort <mo...@cloud9.net>

wrote:

> > I still have my Spotmatic that I bought in 1970.
> >
> > For some reason I decided to look it up and saw that it was named such
> > as it had been designed to make use of a "spot" light meter.
> >
> > Just prior to production, due to the inability to get spot-metering
> > working properly, the metering was changed to "average".
> >
> > However, the name stuck.
>

> My trusty Olympus OM-4 and OM-4T film cameras have the ability to take
> up to 5 spot readings per frame, and then average them. This is very
> helpful, e.g. with someone with light skin and dark clothing, or vice
> versa. One can, for example, take 1 spot reading from the clothing and
> then 2 or 3 from the face, so that the best exposure is gotten for the
> most important area. I wish that my digital camera could do that.

actually 8 readings.

that camera had the absolute best implementation of spot metering ever.
it's unfortunate that no other camera did anything close to it.

you could also mark any spot reading as shadow or highlight and it
adjusted it accordingly. i don't remember what it used for the
adjustment but you could always take a second reading so it had more of
an effect or take another 'normal' spot to reduce it.

[Wolfgang Weisselberg]

Mort <mo...@cloud9.net> wrote:

> My trusty Olympus OM-4 and OM-4T film cameras have the ability to take
> up to 5 spot readings per frame, and then average them. This is very
> helpful, e.g. with someone with light skin and dark clothing, or vice
> versa. One can, for example, take 1 spot reading from the clothing and
> then 2 or 3 from the face, so that the best exposure is gotten for the
> most important area. I wish that my digital camera could do that.

It can, and it does, called matrix metering (or similar).
However, it won't allow you to choose the spots it is
metering, so it's less helpful for the experienced
photographer.

You can still spot meter by hand and average in your brain,
but that's somehow less comfortable.

-Wolfgang

[Robert Coe]

To a portrait or landscape photographer, I guess that could be a useful
feature. For an event photographer to take multiple readings like that would
seem to be out of the question. The most I can manage on a shot-by-shot basis
is an occasional switch between evaluative and center-weighted averaging (and
then hope that I remember which I'm using). And if you're not going to apply
the technique on a shot-by-shot basis, the payoff from the extra work is
illusory, isn't it?

Bob

[Alan Browne]

A sop for those who don't understand how to expose extremes.

You DO NOT WANT TO AVERAGE exposures, you want to expose the film
correctly according to its type and according to the scene.

Thusly:

Negative film: spot meter the dark area you want to have detail in the
image at about 2 - 3 stops under the middle. The high end latitude of
negative film will take care of the highlights without issue.

Positive film: spot meter the highlights (where you want to have detail)
and set that at 2 (maybe 2.5) stops above the middle. Positive film has
much narrower latitude than negative - there won't be as much shadow detail.

Digital: Same as positive - set at 2.5 (experiment with your camera).

--
"A Canadian is someone who knows how to have sex in a canoe."
-Pierre Berton