John wrote: But what sets P�l apart from others here is that he seems constantly to confuse his opinions with fact. When P�l is reporting fact, he is clear and concise and almost always right. But he would do well to realise that his opinions are just that; his opinions.
I must admit to envy; I do wish I possessed his ability to expose film with 100% accuracy, all of the time. Bracketing costs me money. REPLY: I make a very big distinction between fact and my opinion. The problem I can see is that some people don't do the same with my opinions or facts. The info about the MZ-S shutter was not my opinion but a fact learned from camera engineers. YOUR statement about the very same issue was your opinion presented as fact. Don't make assumptions of what I've said based on the statements of those who didn't understand it in the first place. Theres no point in mixing up metering, metering accuracy, exposure accuracy, and correct exposure. They are all different concepts, as I'm sure you know, and just because some constantly mix them up it doesn't mean they are the same thing. I never said I didn't bracket. However, I don't bracket blindly but whithin 1/3s from what I want and thats perfectly doable with consistency, as you probably already know. I've said previously that I very often expose Velvia at 0, the calibrated 0 value of my meter, and +1/3; particularly if there are no highlights in danger of being burned out. P�l
