|Wesley R. Elsberry
Joined: May 2002
Dhogaza, Speaking of paying attention, I explicitly stated that no one here had at any time denied the ability of an autoexposure system to do its job. Acting as though that were a live issue isn't productive.
Nor have I accused midwifetoad or you of being ignorant of the f-stop versus T-stop distinction (or how automation functions, for that matter). What I'm objecting to is what looks to me to be encouraging others who may not know it from even considering learning about it. And I realize that that may simply be an unintended consequence of a particular word choice in that original comment by midwifetoad that has cascaded. But there have been errors committed as well, what with the mention of autofocus as not being affected by T-stop issues and the spurious restriction on how broadly comparison might be touched by that issue. The same tendency to correct invalid claims about evolutionary theory underlies my drive to correct what I perceive to be problems in claims about other topics I know something about.
And that brings us to the Zone System. The Zone System works by systematically removing the uncertainty from the equipment and processes going from film to print. There is a lot of flexibility inherent in that, but the Zone System relies upon calibration so that each element of flexibility becomes characterized and the response to perturbation can be utilized under the control of the photographer. That includes the actual light transmission characteristic of any lens used. The Zone System does not make a difference between marked and actual transmission unimportant, it makes it well-characterized and part of the control of the process that is the photographer's responsibility.
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker