# Why is metering not linked to AF spot?



## RadioPath (Jul 30, 2013)

Hi guys,
I just read that on Nikon bodies spot metering is linked to the selected AF spot, while on canon bodies (such as my 6D) it is not, 1D bodies being the exception. My question is why? Is it expensive or more difficult to construct or is it just a software limitation for marketing purposes that could be changed with magic lanter or sth.?
Thanks
RadioPath


----------



## cocopop05 (Jul 30, 2013)

I thought it was on the 5D Mark III.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 30, 2013)

My relatively ancient EOS 3 has it. Seems an anachronism. I rarely use spot metering however, or any of the Ae modes (although I am sometimes guided by the metering scale which would perhaps benefit)


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Jul 30, 2013)

Yes, would be a nice feature to have.
The pictures from my 1d4 are more accurately exposed in comparision to the 5d3, btw.


----------



## caruser (Jul 30, 2013)

It appears to be artificial product segmentation.

It seems to work in their favour, this feature was one of the reasons that made me get a 1DX over a 5DIII.

Of course some other people might have chosen a Nikon over a non-1-series Canon, we don't have the numbers.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 30, 2013)

caruser said:


> It appears to be artificial product segmentation.



Agreed. Worth noting that on all Canon bodies, evaluative metering is weighted toward the selected AF point. 

The alternative on non-1-series bodies is to spot meter then use AE Lock and recompose.


----------



## RadioPath (Jul 30, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> caruser said:
> 
> 
> > It appears to be artificial product segmentation.
> ...



That's what I do now, not always that convenient. Any chance this can be changed in the future by ml or such, like spot metering was added to the 400d?


----------



## tron (Jul 30, 2013)

RadioPath said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > caruser said:
> ...


It will have to be supported in hardware in the first place. Does it? We do not know...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 30, 2013)

Cameras made and designed by different manufacturers are ... well different. There tend to be a lot of questions that indicate people think they should be somehow identical. 

That's not going to happen. Pick a camera that has the features you need most. Its like buying a car, its always a compromise.


----------



## RadioPath (Jul 30, 2013)

tron said:


> RadioPath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Makes sense. Are there Canon cameras that got it later?



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Cameras made and designed by different manufacturers are ... well different. There tend to be a lot of questions that indicate people think they should be somehow identical.
> 
> That's not going to happen. Pick a camera that has the features you need most. Its like buying a car, its always a compromise.



I get that and I'm very happy with my camera. This doesn't seem to be a question of principle in design like dslr vs mirror less or sth like that if other companies put it in. Will have to wait I guess


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 30, 2013)

RadioPath said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > RadioPath said:
> ...


There are patents, but it is more likely a matter of design choices as to which features to include when you design the AF system and related firmware.


----------

