Landscape Light Meter

[EdinburghGary]

Guys,

I have a budget of £500 for a light meter, and I am looking for the best option for landscapes. It needs to be perfect for high contrast scenes, as well as the more subdued early and late golden hour lanndscapes. I want a meter that gets absolutely spot on readings to enable me to ensure I am shooting my film effectively.

This model appears to get LOTS of good reviews:
http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk/item/360-220V/

Is it overkill though? I will not spend £500 if I can get exactly what I need for half the price. However, if the more expensive models allow me to work quicker, and if they come with features which make my life easier, I will pay up.

The trouble is, I really don't understand exactly what type of metering is best. I hear some people say SPOT, and then others say instead of measuring reflective light, that I should use an incident meter.

What I like about the meter I have linked to, you can take several readings, and average them out into one final reading.

Any help appreciated.

Gary.

[DiddyDave]

Only had a quick peek there Gary - but I didn't see what degree it's spot meter was. For your purposes I'd be looking at something with a 1 degree spot, and certainly no more than 3 degrees

The rest of the spec looks fine though, and telling you which ND grad to use I suppose could be a useful gimmick

There is a book on 'Understanding Exposure' - I think it's called, which everyone raves about. Personally, I think you'd do better to buy & digest it first to truly understand what you need to then purchase & why

:)

DD

[Steve Smith]

The two main types of metering are Ambient and Incident.

Ambient is the simplest method and works by pointing the meter at the subject from the camera position. The meter works out the exposure based on the assumption that a normal scene reflects an average of 18% light. An extension of this is to measure an 18% grey card held in the same light.

Incident metering is the next stage. This is done by putting a diffusing dome over the meter's sensor and holding the meter at the subject position and pointing it at the camera. Great for outdoor portraits - not so good if your subject is a range of mountains two miles away!

This meter caters for both of those modes: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1006770

It can also do flash metering if you ever want to get into that.

Spot metering usually requires a separate dedicated meter with a one degree view although meters are available which combine the functions of the one above with a five degree spot: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1009841

A spot meter can be most simply used by pointing it at something in the scene which you consider to be mid grey and using the exposure the meter suggests. You can also use it to measure the shadow and highlight values and select an exposure in between.

Another advantage of a spot meter is that you can use it to meter the midtones, shadows and highlights, use the midtone reading for your exposure, ensure that the shadow reading will still record detail and if you are using a film with a lower dynamic range, use the highlight (sky) reading to decide which value of ND grad to use to hold back the sky.

As an example, you meter the mid tones and the meter suggests a setting of 1/125 f8. The shadow reading suggests 1/125 f4 which is two stops less light on the subject which is fine.

The highlight reading of the sky however may suggest 1/500 f22 which is five stops above mid and a total of seven stops range.

If you are using a transparency film with only a six stop range then you will need a one stop ND filter to reduce the brightness of the sky a bit and to allow the full range of the scene to fit into the range of the film.

That is a very simplified description so I suggest you do a search for an article written by someone more knowledgeable than me on this subject.

Here is a dedicated Pentax spot meter: http://www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?pName=pentax-digital-spotmeter

As you can see, the incident/ambient/flash meters are well within your budget but the spot meter may require a bit more saving!

telling you which ND grad to use I suppose could be a useful gimmick

replace the word 'gimmick' with 'technique'!!




Steve.

[DiddyDave]

The two main types of metering are Ambient and Incident.

Ambient is the simplest method and works by pointing the meter at the subject from the camera position. The meter works out the exposure based on the assumption that a normal scene reflects an average of 18% light. An extension of this is to measure an 18% grey card held in the same light.

Incident metering is the next stage. This is done by putting a diffusing dome over the meter's sensor and holding the meter at the subject position and pointing it at the camera. Great for outdoor portraits - not so good if your subject is a range of mountains two miles away!

This meter caters for both of those modes: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1006770

It can also do flash metering if you ever want to get into that.

Spot metering usually requires a separate dedicated meter with a one degree view although meters are available which combine the functions of the one above with a five degree spot: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1009841

A spot meter can be most simply used by pointing it at something in the scene which you consider to be mid grey and using the exposure the meter suggests. You can also use it to measure the shadow and highlight values and select an exposure in between.

Another advantage of a spot meter is that you can use it to meter the midtones, shadows and highlights, use the midtone reading for your exposure, ensure that the shadow reading will still record detail and if you are using a film with a lower dynamic range, use the highlight (sky) reading to decide which value of ND grad to use to hold back the sky.

As an example, you meter the mid tones and the meter suggests a setting of 1/125 f8. The shadow reading suggests 1/125 f4 which is two stops less light on the subject which is fine.

The highlight reading of the sky however may suggest 1/500 f22 which is five stops above mid and a total of seven stops range.

If you are using a transparency film with only a six stop range then you will need a one stop ND filter to reduce the brightness of the sky a bit and to allow the full range of the scene to fit into the range of the film.

That is a very simplified description so I suggest you do a search for an article written by someone more knowledgeable than me on this subject.

Here is a dedicated Pentax spot meter: http://www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?pName=pentax-digital-spotmeter

As you can see, the incident/ambient/flash meters are well within your budget but the spot meter may require a bit more saving!



replace the word 'gimmick' with 'technique'!!




Steve.


Nicely done there Steve - I still think Gary (anyone) should truly understand what they are after before spending £xxx on a lightmeter though, as just 'playing' could mean disappointment

:thumbs:

DD

[DiddyDave]

replace the word 'gimmick' with 'technique'!!

I said gimmick as after the first few uses you should be realising that you don't need that feature and will never use it again ;)

DD

[Steve Smith]

Nicely done there Steve

Thanks. That was the second time I wrote it out as the first time I hit the back navigation by mistake and lost it!

I still think Gary (anyone) should truly understand what they are after before spending £xxx on a lightmeter though, as just 'playing' could mean disappointment

I agree. They are a lot of cash which could be spent on.... more film!

I personally meter with a 1950's Zeiss Ikon Ikophot meter which is surprisingly accurate and works fine with transparency film (and I refuse to bracket shots) and a not quite so old Weston Master II which I am sure has had a cell replacement in recent years.

Both of these were given to me by my father so were free (my favourite price!) but can be picked up fairly cheaply.

In normal daylight though, the sunny sixteen rule works fine for me as I usually use black and white negative film which isn't as picky as transparency film.

Another good resource is this: telling you which ND grad to use I suppose could be a useful gimmick

As an extension of the sunny 16 rule.



Steve.

[EdinburghGary]

Only had a quick peek there Gary - but I didn't see what degree it's spot meter was. For your purposes I'd be looking at something with a 1 degree spot, and certainly no more than 3 degrees

The rest of the spec looks fine though, and telling you which ND grad to use I suppose could be a useful gimmick

There is a book on 'Understanding Exposure' - I think it's called, which everyone raves about. Personally, I think you'd do better to buy & digest it first to truly understand what you need to then purchase & why

:)

DD

I have the book, read half of it and lost it :( Will buy it again. The meter has a 1 degree spot function.

Gary.

[Steve Smith]

replace the word 'gimmick' with 'technique'!!

I said gimmick as after the first few uses you should be realising that you don't need that feature and will never use it again ;)

Ah. I assume you mean the gimmick of the meter doing the maths for you.


Steve.

[DiddyDave]

I have the book, read half of it and lost it :( Will buy it again. The meter has a 1 degree spot function.

Gary.

Goodo - and there was me thinking you new sod all about zone methods etc.

Well if it has decent reviews too, then I think that's a good price for such a device as a mate of mine bought a 2nd hand one (some other make) for over £500 recently

DD

[CT]

I'd highly recommend the Sekonic L-558 although I think it's been replaced now by a newer model. I bought mine 2nd hand, and saved a few bob. It's all the meter you'll ever need, with 1 degree spot mode, incident light mode, flash mode, and so many other modes that I've disabled some of them in the interests of keeping things simpler. It also comes with a radio module installed which enables the meter to trigger remote flashguns, and also has the facility to take multiple spot readings.

It's all the meter you're ever likely to need, and a 1 degree spot is pretty well essential for landscape work as DD says.

A spot meter can cause more problems than it solves though unless you have a good understanding of what you're doing with it, so you need to get your nose stuck into some reading Gary. ;)

A meter is something I'd look for 2nd hand. Ffordes usually have a good selection in stock.

L-558 (http://www.photosolution.co.uk/sekonic-l-558-dual-master-p-918.html)

[EdinburghGary]

Goodo - and there was me thinking you new sod all about zone methods etc.

Well if it has decent reviews too, then I think that's a good price for such a device as a mate of mine bought a 2nd hand one (some other make) for over £500 recently

DD

Just bought it, brand new and next day delivery, £300 :D

http://shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews/accessories/0408kenko/

and

http://shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews/accessories/1008kenkos/

Seems to be very good.

Gary.

[EdinburghGary]

I'd highly recommend the Sekonic L-558 although I think it's been replaced now by a newer model. I bought mine 2nd hand, and saved a few bob. It's all the meter you'll ever need, with 1 degree spot mode, incident light mode, flash mode, and so many other modes that I've disabled some of them in the interests of keeping things simpler. It also comes with a radio module installed which enables the meter to trigger remote flashguns, and also has the facility to take multiple spot readings.

It's all the meter you're ever likely to need, and a 1 degree spot is pretty well essential for landscape work as DD says.

A spot meter can cause more problems than it solves though unless you have a good understanding of what you're doing with it, so you need to get your nose stuck into some reading Gary. ;)

A meter is something I'd look for 2nd hand. Ffordes usually have a good selection in stock.

L-558 (http://www.photosolution.co.uk/sekonic-l-558-dual-master-p-918.html)

Thanks CT - any recommended reading other than "Understanding Exposure"?

I just bought the Kenko model, but I guess they and the 508 have similar functionality, or at least, everything I will need.

Gary.

[Steve Smith]

I just bought the Kenko model.

That will do everything and more you could ever want a meter to do for you (although I don't think it makes tea!)


Steve.

[EdinburghGary]

That will do everything and more you could ever want a meter to do for you (although I don't think it makes tea!)


Steve.

Thanks for all the advice Steve, looking forward to trying to get my head round it!

Gary.

[CT]

FFordes have one NEW L-558 in stock for 279.99- hugely reduced. Grab it quick! ;)

[CT]

Thanks CT - any recommended reading other than "Understanding Exposure"?

To be honest Gary there must be a gazillion articles on the web which will tell all you need to know

I just bought the Kenko model, but I guess they and the 508 have similar functionality, or at least, everything I will need.

Gary.
Oh well you've done nowt wrong there - it looks a very well spec'd meter.

[DiddyDave]

FFordes have one NEW L-558 in stock for 279.99- hugely reduced. Grab it quick! ;)

:eek::eek::eek:

I don't need it - but I want it :lol:

DD

[CT]

LOL. I know exactly what your mean! :lol:

Actually that one does cine as well if you want to go into Speilberg mode.:woot:

I might be misinforming you about the radio module Dave - might in fact be an option - mine came with it.

[arclight]

When I gave up film I sold my Weston Master V with invercone for incident light readings.
That was a mistake. Never had problems with exposure when using that meter.

[EdinburghGary]

When I gave up film I sold my Weston Master V with invercone for incident light readings.
That was a mistake. Never had problems with exposure when using that meter.

How can you incidence a distant landscape? I could send my wife down the road in the car, and get her to SMS me the settings I guess :D

Gary.

[CT]

How can you incidence a distant landscape? I could send my wife down the road in the car, and get her to SMS me the settings I guess :D

Gary.
That's the beauty of an incident reading - as long as the light falling on the distant subject is the same as where you take the reading, you're good to go.

[DiddyDave]

How can you incidence a distant landscape? I could send my wife down the road in the car, and get her to SMS me the settings I guess :D

Gary.

That's certainly one way of doing it ;)

Seriously though, if you're in the same light as the distant landscape, the reading will be the same

DD

[DiddyDave]

That's the beauty of an incident reading - as long as the light falling on the distant subject is the same as where you take the reading, you're good to go.

Bugger - beaten to it :D

DD

[EdinburghGary]

Thanks guys,

I am like a sponge - love how much knowledge there is here.

Gary.

[CT]

LOL. There's nothing mysterious about that white incident cone Gary. All it does is reduce the amount of light to 18% so it gives a very similar result to metering on an 18% grey card.

[EdinburghGary]

LOL. There's nothing mysterious about that white incident cone Gary. All it does is reduce the amount of light to 18% so it gives a very similar result to metering on an 18% grey card.

So as long as the light falling is the same, then it should be as accurate as it gets in terms of an average scene?

I guess then the problems you have are, if you are standing in extreme shade/brightness, and the focal point is not, OR if my landscape has crazy variations in contrast and light, that you want that bit more creative freedom. Having the spot as an option is "spot on" :D

Gary.

[DiddyDave]

Thanks guys,

I am like a sponge - love how much knowledge there is here.

Gary.

Time for a change of Avatar mate :thumbs:

DD

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/2068/EG_-_sponge.jpg

[CT]

So as long as the light falling is the same, then it should be as accurate as it gets in terms of an average scene?

I guess then the problems you have are, if you are standing in extreme shade/brightness, and the focal point is not, OR if my landscape has crazy variations in contrast and light, that you want that bit more creative freedom. Having the spot as an option is "spot on" :D

Gary.

You've pretty well got it Gary. You obviously wouldn't take your incident reading in the shade if those distant mountains were bathed in sunshine, and the very narrow 1 degree spot helps you cope with difficult scenes by metering a small tone or tones in those distant mountains.

Every tog should have a meter whether they know how to use it or not - it impresses the arse off people when you wave one about at a wedding. :lol:

[DiddyDave]

- it impresses the arse off people when you wave one about at a wedding. :lol:


:eek::eek::eek:

That's MY technique

:eek::eek::eek:

DD

[EdBray]

Gary, If you mainly want it for landscapes and flash you could do a lot worse than a S/H Minolta Flashmeter F. I have one and it is great for flash but even better for landscapes.

Allows you to take highlight based readings and shadow based readings.

Brochure here (http://www.rogercavanagh.com/MyGear/LinkedDocuments/Minolta%20Spotmeter%20F.pdf)

Manual here (http://www.rogercavanagh.com/MyGear/MinoltaSpotmeterF.html)

I picked mine up from ebay, mint, with case and manual for £230, doesn't do incident though, but to be honest if you get to know your spotmeter you don't really need it.

[HoppyUK]

That's a lovely meter, but how difficult is this exposure business? Especially bearing in mind that...

Film speed is only accurate to plus/minus 1/3rd stop.
Leaf shutters are notoriously inaccurate (1/500sec is nearer 1/350sec).
High f/numbers are often inaccurate, and/or inconsistent.
Film changes over time (stick it in the freezer).

Which explains why even the most confident photographers shoot Polaroids, bracket important shots, and clip-test the processing. You'll be wanting a colour temperature meter next, and a pile of Wratten filters.

But I do admire the pursuit of excellence and if you really really want to get into the academic side of exposure, then Ansel Adams' Zone System is the place to be. He wrote several books about it. TBH that Understanding Exposure book that people rate so highly is pretty superficial.

[artona]

Agree with HoppyUK, Ansel Adams and his Zone system is the ultimate guide. The thing to get your head around is that accurate exposure is more aligned to black and white. In ansels zone system 18% grey is zone 5. So if you had a grey card and pointed your spot meter at that and set for that exposure you would record the image tones as accurately as possible.

I have taken this from a website

* Zone 9 pure white +4
* Zone 8 white with little detail +3
* Zone 7 greyish-white highlights +2
* Zone 6 light grey +1
* Zone 5 18% grey 0
* Zone 4 darkish grey -1
* Zone 3 blackish grey -2
* Zone 2 greyish black some texture -3
* Zone 1 Black with little detail -4
* Zone 0 key black no detail -5

What you can now do by using your experience of the system is alter where zone 5 is. Suppose you want detail in zone 0 and you are happy to lose the detail in zone 8..... take you spot meter reading and then alter your exposure to expose for zone 4 which alters the tonal range accordingly.

Remember a spot meter only gives you more control. Once you have mastered it then becomes an asset. Until you master i.e you learn where to point it you will think it useless

Have a look at http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/photography/84891

stew

[Steve Smith]

Leaf shutters are notoriously inaccurate (1/500sec is nearer 1/350sec).

It's usually only the fast speeds. 1/500 and possibly 1/250. That's probably why the top speed on an RB67 is marked 1/400 instead of 1/500.


Steve.

[EdBray]

Just a further note to Stew's post above.

The thing that most people don't seem 'to get' is that 'the zone system' is designed to work in conjuction with the developing process, and is really designed for Monochrome use only!

Firstly, everyone should be metering off a known tone, and then setting the camera accordingly, whether it be off a mid grey (zone 5) such as grass, light tarmac, blue sky about 90 degrees from the sun, this would be a straight setting for a correct exposure, if you meter from something darker or lighter say something on zone 3 or zone 7 then you would adjust the exposure accordingly. This is not using the zone system :nono: but many people think it is. It is just correct exposure control!

It is very difficult to use the zone system with 35mm Film as it was primarily developed (pun intended) for sheet film use, but can be used with MF if you have a camera with interchangeble backs and a minimum of 3 of these.

How it works is that you use your experience to decide what is the dynamic range you want for the scene you are taking. If the scene is too contrasty you would under develop the film (-1 known as contraction) to enable the full range of tones to be printed, and if the image was lacking contrast you could over develop the film (+1 known as expansion) to boost the contrast to give a full range of printable tones. Hence the need for 3 backs. Each back would be designated either -1, N, +1 and shots taken accordingly on each. Each film would then be developed seperately according to the required contrast control.

This is much easier to do with sheet film as you can develop each individual sheet

The idea of the zone system is that you have to visualise the final image, expose for a full tonal range and then develop the film to give you that full tonal range, then, using the correct grade of printing paper to fine tune the dynamic range make your perfect print.

If you every get the chance to see a fine 20" x 24" print from one of the exponents of the true zone system, it will blow you away!

[EdinburghGary]

Guys,

Thanks again for all the hints, tips, expert viewpoints and overall kindness. Amazes me that people take the time to share knowledge like this. Us kids of the digital era must have it so easy to the guys cutting their teeth on the old stuff all those years ago.

Don't be fooled though, cutting said teeth is required, and I wonder how many of us actually try hard enough. I personally (talking about myself), I personally feel that it's so easy to grab your digital camera, bracket like a fool, take 1,000s of photos on a day out, and try and salvage from what would literally, be hundreds of pounds worth of film if not shooting digital. This "spread shooting" is as much luck as it is skill. I now have a hunger to at least try and remove this "weakness" that my digital technique has instilled.

My biggest problem, is knowing where to focus next (heehee), and how extreme to be with my hunger to improve. I don't want my bags of digital gear going unused, but perhaps I will limit myself to a 1GB card or so.

Anyway. Where the hell do these spontaneous rants come from, beats me. I only wanted to say thanks, then my fingers went for a walk down qwerty lane!!

Gary.

[arclight]

Guys,



Don't be fooled though, cutting said teeth is required, and I wonder how many of us actually try hard enough. I personally (talking about myself), I personally feel that it's so easy to grab your digital camera, bracket like a fool, take 1,000s of photos on a day out, and try and salvage from what would literally, be hundreds of pounds worth of film if not shooting digital. This "spread shooting" is as much luck as it is skill. I now have a hunger to at least try and remove this "weakness" that my digital technique has instilled.



Gary.

Using colour transparency film (with an incident light meter) was a good teacher. It had a very tight exposure latitude (maybe still does - I am out of touch with film now)
The film was relatively expensive and shooting off reams was out of the question for normal mortals on average incomes.

I indulge in "spread shooting" from time to time, but wrongly exposed images still annoy me.
Your post has tempted me to get an incident light meter again.

[EdinburghGary]

Using colour transparency film (with an incident light meter) was a good teacher. It had a very tight exposure latitude (maybe still does - I am out of touch with film now)
The film was relatively expensive and shooting off reams was out of the question for normal mortals on average incomes.

I indulge in "spread shooting" from time to time, but wrongly exposed images still annoy me.
Your post has tempted me to get an incident light meter again.

Mine has just arrived - it's fricking huge! And looks complicated :(
Gary.

[CT]

Mine has just arrived - it's fricking huge! And looks complicated :(
Gary.

LOL. It's only has complicated as you want it be Gary - but I do know what you mean. :D

Sit down and play with it - at least have a token go at reading the manual and understanding at least one of the modes - Incident readings would be a good start.

This is where your digital DSLR comes in handy - you can now set your meter and DSLR on the same ISO. Now take an incident light reading with your new meter. Set your DSLR in Manual Mode and set exactly the readings from your meter( Ignoring any indicated imbalance in the camera meter display) See what you get. Now take the same scene with your DSLR on Aperture Priority and matrix metering, noting any difference in exposure readings. You'll be surprised how often there's a very significant difference between the two images.

Play, play and play some more. ;)

[EdinburghGary]

LOL. It's only has complicated as you want it be Gary - but I do know what you mean. :D

Sit down and play with it - at least have a token go at reading the manual and understanding at least one of the modes - Incident readings would be a good start.

This is where your digital DSLR comes in handy - you can now set your meter and DSLR on the same ISO. Now take an incident light reading with your new meter. Set your DSLR in Manual Mode and set exactly the readings from your meter( Ignoring any indicated imbalance in the camera meter display) See what you get. Now take the same scene with your DSLR on Aperture Priority and matrix metering, noting any difference in exposure readings. You'll be surprised how often there's a very significant difference between the two images.

Play, play and play some more. ;)

I have a week of Mull, me, and the cameras :) Gonna nail film. I promise.

Gary.

[jerry12953]

Just a further note to Stew's post above.

The thing that most people don't seem 'to get' is that 'the zone system' is designed to work in conjuction with the developing process, and is really designed for Monochrome use only!

Firstly, everyone should be metering off a known tone, and then setting the camera accordingly, whether it be off a mid grey (zone 5) such as grass, light tarmac, blue sky about 90 degrees from the sun, this would be a straight setting for a correct exposure, if you meter from something darker or lighter say something on zone 3 or zone 7 then you would adjust the exposure accordingly. This is not using the zone system :nono: but many people think it is. It is just correct exposure control!

It is very difficult to use the zone system with 35mm Film as it was primarily developed (pun intended) for sheet film use, but can be used with MF if you have a camera with interchangeble backs and a minimum of 3 of these.

How it works is that you use your experience to decide what is the dynamic range you want for the scene you are taking. If the scene is too contrasty you would under develop the film (-1 known as contraction) to enable the full range of tones to be printed, and if the image was lacking contrast you could over develop the film (+1 known as expansion) to boost the contrast to give a full range of printable tones. Hence the need for 3 backs. Each back would be designated either -1, N, +1 and shots taken accordingly on each. Each film would then be developed seperately according to the required contrast control.

This is much easier to do with sheet film as you can develop each individual sheet

The idea of the zone system is that you have to visualise the final image, expose for a full tonal range and then develop the film to give you that full tonal range, then, using the correct grade of printing paper to fine tune the dynamic range make your perfect print.

If you every get the chance to see a fine 20" x 24" print from one of the exponents of the true zone system, it will blow you away!

Taking all that into account you can be sure that Ansel Adams would have been into digital .....

[jerry12953]

:eek::eek::eek:

That's MY technique

:eek::eek::eek:

DD

:lol::lol::lol:

[EdinburghGary]

Taking all that into account you can be sure that Ansel Adams would have been into digital .....

Now this is NOT an accusation - however, if anyone wants to reply to this in the Digital vs Film context, PLEASE take into the war in the other thread :D

Gary.

[Steve Smith]

Taking all that into account you can be sure that Ansel Adams would have been into digital .....

I'm not going to argue with that. He used Polaroid a bit so he was certainly in favour of instant results.


Steve.

[Steve Smith]

Mine has just arrived - it's fricking huge! And looks complicated :(

If you don't want it, post it to me and I will dispose of it for you.


Steve.

[CT]

I have a week of Mull, me, and the cameras :) Gonna nail film. I promise.

Gary.

The biggest problem is waiting for feedback with film from your experimental metering shots. Even then they don't mean a thing unless you've studiously kept notes of all your image exposure settings. Your DSLR is a boon for instant feedback and it's a lot cheaper than Polaroids. ;)

[EdinburghGary]

The biggest problem is waiting for feedback with film from your experimental metering shots. Even then they don't mean a thing unless you've studiously kept notes of all your image exposure settings. Your DSLR is a boon for instant feedback and it's a lot cheaper than Polaroids. ;)

Don't worry - my D3 will be in tow everywhere :D I plan on one or two film shots a day, and perhaps 10 digital.

Gary.

[EdBray]

Taking all that into account you can be sure that Ansel Adams would have been into digital .....

He actually stated that digital imaging would be the next great advance in photography. I have no doubt he would have embraced it fully and used his previous experience and knowledge to adapt it to his needs.

Now this is NOT an accusation - however, if anyone wants to reply to this in the Digital vs Film context, PLEASE take into the war in the other thread :D
Gary.

I don't understand why anyone should be against one or the other, they are both excellent photographic mediums in their own right and each have their supporters. Much like the debates (arguements) about 35mm/MF/LF, why? Each to their own, I would never have expected to see Cartier Bresson (I personally didn't rate him to be honest, he took a few good images, but then who hasn't) using a LF camera any more than I would have expected Ansel Adams to have used an fixed focal length, fixed exposure 110 camera, but each still had their exponents and even the 110 camera would have produced the odd good image (quality would still have been crap though).

Don't worry - my D3 will be in tow everywhere :D I plan on one or two film shots a day, and perhaps 10 digital.

Gary.

You are going to have to get a trailor fitted out for you to move all your kit around for a shoot. I can't wait until you get into birding and start carting around 600mm & 800mm lenses too!

I hope you have been training hard like 'Wee Geordie' did? :lol:

[HoppyUK]

LOL. It's only has complicated as you want it be Gary - but I do know what you mean. :D

Sit down and play with it - at least have a token go at reading the manual and understanding at least one of the modes - Incident readings would be a good start.

This is where your digital DSLR comes in handy - you can now set your meter and DSLR on the same ISO. Now take an incident light reading with your new meter. Set your DSLR in Manual Mode and set exactly the readings from your meter( Ignoring any indicated imbalance in the camera meter display) See what you get. Now take the same scene with your DSLR on Aperture Priority and matrix metering, noting any difference in exposure readings. You'll be surprised how often there's a very significant difference between the two images.

Play, play and play some more. ;)

That's a really interesting experiment. I've noticed that when using an incident reading (deliberately, because the exposure looked tricky) that matrix metering gets uncannily close to it :thinking:

If the camera is reading a few dozen different points from the scene, it knows the dynamic range of the image well enough. It also knows the dynamic range of the sensor. I guess it's not a huge task to programme it to know pretty well where to pin the exposure most of the time.

That's more or less exactly what you would do with a spot meter with the Zone System.

[CT]

That's a really interesting experiment. I've noticed that when using an incident reading (deliberately, because the exposure looked tricky) that matrix metering gets uncannily close to it :thinking:

It's much the same with evaluative metering, which is Canon's version of matrix metering. There's no denying they give pretty good results most of the time. It's amazing though, that both these systems read from multiple points then reference thousands of images stored in the camera before giving a readout, yet a simple incident light reading often gives a better result.


If the camera is reading a few dozen different points from the scene, it knows the dynamic range of the image well enough. It also knows the dynamic range of the sensor. I guess it's not a huge task to programme it to know pretty well where to pin the exposure most of the time.

That's more or less exactly what you would do with a spot meter with the Zone System.

Agreed - except you'd be making the decisions - not the onboard Dalek. :D

It's interesting that any decent meter can be user calibrated, but I've not yet seen a DSLR with this option. I know you can achieve the same end by adjusting ISO or exposure compensation, but what's wrong with a global setting somewhere deep in the menu system where it wont get accidentally reset? Perhaps it's me? :thinking:

[EdinburghGary]

Using the SPOT on my D3 and the SPOT on my new handheld, there is a slight difference. For example, D3 says f2.8 and 500th of a second on an area on my screen. Handheld, f2.8 and 250th.

Gary.

[CT]

Using the SPOT on my D3 and the SPOT on my new handheld, there is a slight difference. For example, D3 says f2.8 and 500th of a second on an area on my screen. Handheld, f2.8 and 250th.

Gary.
I rest my case. :D Why should you have to calibrate the meter to the camera? :shrug: You've paid a lotta dosh for that meter which only has to perform one function - you'd think you should be able to trust it - especially on something as clear cut as a spot reading. That 'slight difference' is one whole stop btw Gary.

[EdBray]

Using the SPOT on my D3 and the SPOT on my new handheld, there is a slight difference. For example, D3 says f2.8 and 500th of a second on an area on my screen. Handheld, f2.8 and 250th.

Gary.

LOL hardly a slight difference. One whole stop.

Funny thing is most SLR camera meters overexpose by about 2/3rds of a stop as the meters are calibrated against a 12% grey as opposed to the 18% grey of Zone 5. Would explain why your slides have been slightly underexposed as it is normal to underexpose a transparancy film by 1/3 - 2/3rds of a stop. Your reading would make that even lower by a 1/3 - 2/3rds of a stop.

You are now going to have to do some tests with your new meter against the Mamiya to verify the best setting for your film choice.

If using Velvia 50, you are going to have to take an average type image at various EVs and after processing decide which is best. Then adjust the ISO on the meter to give you the correct meter reading for that film. Based on what you have said, I suspect you will need to set somewhere in the region of ISO 80 to get the correct exposure.

But a test film is a must! Before you can rely on your meter you have to calibrate it against your film stock!

[EdinburghGary]

LOL hardly a slight difference. One whole stop.

Funny thing is most SLR camera meters overexpose by about 2/3rds of a stop as the meters are calibrated against a 12% grey as opposed to the 18% grey of Zone 5. Would explain why your slides have been slightly underexposed as it is normal to underexpose a transparancy film by 1/3 - 2/3rds of a stop. Your reading would make that even lower by a 1/3 - 2/3rds of a stop.

You are now going to have to do some tests with your new meter against the Mamiya to verify the best setting for your film choice.

If using Velvia 50, you are going to have to take an average type image at various EVs and after processing decide which is best. Then adjust the ISO on the meter to give you the correct meter reading for that film. Based on what you have said, I suspect you will need to set somewhere in the region of ISO 80 to get the correct exposure.

But a test film is a must! Before you can rely on your meter you have to calibrate it against your film stock!

The meter just arrived, and it was a quick test. I will try and be more conclusive, although I leave for mull in morning.

The D3 result, the whites appeared hotter. The hand held, I guess it seemed to air on the side of caution. Worth remembering the D3 has a focal point for spot, much larger than the 1 degree spot on the hand held.

I think this meter allows me to calibrate it to several film types and cameras, still reading the guide.

I will take tests and post results.

Gary.

[CT]

The D3 result, the whites appeared hotter. The hand held, I guess it seemed to air on the side of caution.

Gary.

That's pretty much what I find. When it's a non- difficult scene tones- wise and the light isn't unduly contrasty the camera seems to nail it well enough. The same scene in contrasty sunlight though and the camera seems to tend toward blowing the highlights while a straight reading from the hand held incident light meter preserves the highlights at the expense of the shadows which I find preferable.

[EdinburghGary]

That's pretty much what I find. When it's a non- difficult scene tones- wise and the light isn't unduly contrasty the camera seems to nail it well enough. The same scene in contrasty sunlight though and the camera seems to tend toward blowing the highlights while a straight reading from the hand held incident light meter preserves the highlights at the expense of the shadows which I find preferable.

Just taken some high contrast scenes, some interesting findings. Will post in next 10 to 15.

G.

[EdinburghGary]

OK. First thing I noticed, the light meter in its current settings refused to meter off the black couch, or Basil's black fur.

Here are the results of metering on Baxters white fur, and then brown / orange fur.

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/6296/57727239.jpg


http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/5095/85728740.jpg


http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/7348/42765028.jpg


http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/7397/99157461.jpg

[EdinburghGary]

The last image is an error, it should read 25th of a second.

To confirm:

Image 1: D3 Meter, 4th of a second

Image 2: Hand Held Meter, 8th of a Secomd

Image 3: Hand Held 30th

Image 4: D3, 25th

Gary.

[EdBray]

Okay, the second set of images, when you metered off the white leg, did you the open up the exposure by 2 stops?

[EdinburghGary]

Okay, the second set of images, when you metered off the white leg, did you the open up the exposure by 2 stops?

I used the settings suggested by each device for the various photos...uploading another 2.

[EdBray]

I used the settings suggested by each device for the various photos...uploading another 2.

I'm confused now.

You can't just aim it at a white object and use those settings, the result will be vastly underexposed. Similarly if you meter off a black object and use those settings it will be vastly overexposed. The meter always thinks you are pointing it at a mid tone.

Pop over to the two dogs and take an incident reading and fire off one like that.

[EdinburghGary]

5
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/2303/16223191.jpg


6
http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/1913/95511862.jpg

[EdinburghGary]

I'm confused now.

You can't just aim it at a white object and use those settings, the result will be vastly underexposed. Similarly if you meter off a black object and use those settings it will be vastly overexposed. The meter always thinks you are pointing it at a mid tone.

I thought with spot (reflective metering), it would expose for the item in the reticule?

I am using spot on both the D3 and the Hand Held.

Gary.

[EdinburghGary]

I'm confused now.

You can't just aim it at a white object and use those settings, the result will be vastly underexposed. Similarly if you meter off a black object and use those settings it will be vastly overexposed. The meter always thinks you are pointing it at a mid tone.

Pop over to the two dogs and take an incident reading and fire off one like that.

Oh sorry, I see your point. Yes, I understand that if I meter off either extreme, it will destroy the photo. I was trying to illustrate the difference in the areas I exposed for (ie, fur detail - ignoring the rest I guess).

Gary.

[CT]

LOL. :popcorn:

[CT]

LOL. :popcorn:
Ed is bang on btw Gary.

[EdinburghGary]

Ed is bang on btw Gary.



Where would one meter then, on the two dogs for example? We have blacks, whites and the orange fur...

[EdBray]

You need to be taking exposures of images with a lot of different tones in them.

Choose subjects to meter from that give you a good basis for trial shots. The dogs white leg was a good one because it is a white object in which you wish to retain detail. Take your spot meter reading with camera and meter and then adjust the exposure to give you 2 additional stops, for example if meter says 1/60 @ f4 use 1/15 @ f4 also after doing both meters, take an incident reading just above the dogs leg and enter that reading directly into the camera.

[EdinburghGary]

You need to be taking exposures of images with a lot of different tones in them.

Choose subjects to meter from that give you a good basis for trial shots. The dogs white leg was a good one because it is a white object in which you wish to retain detail. Take your spot meter reading with camera and meter and then adjust the exposure to give you 2 additional stops, for example if meter says 1/60 @ f4 use 1/15 @ f4 also after doing both meters, take an incident reading just above the dogs leg and enter that reading directly into the camera.

Sorry for being a complete noob here :D Lets pretend I only want to retain leg detail on the white leg for a second. Forfeit the rest of the photo. If the meter says use 1/60 and f4, why would I add 2 stops?

Sorry I am obviously failing to grasp the concepts here :D Thanks for helping out.

Gary.

[CT]

You don't want to blow the highlights, so I'd meter for those, which you know will under-expose the rest of the shot. The trick now is to give a bit more exposure for the shadows without blowing the highlights, so try opening up between one and two stops from what the straight reading indicates and you should get a more balanced result.

[EdinburghGary]

You don't want to blow the highlights, so I'd meter for those, which you know will under-expose the rest of the shot. The trick now is to give a bit more exposure for the shadows without blowing the highlights, so try opening up between one and two stops from what the straight reading indicates and you should get a more balanced result.

So is it safe to say, the meters "play it safe"? In my mind, I guess I thought the meter reading was at the limit. If I meter off a highlight for example, it was at the ceiling - if I go over by a stop, it would blow the whites. So, is it safe to assume I have some latitude for pushing above the readings?

Gary.

[CT]

So is it safe to say, the meters "play it safe"? In my mind, I guess I thought the meter reading was at the limit. If I meter off a highlight for example, it was at the ceiling - if I go over by a stop, it would blow the whites. So, is it safe to assume I have some latitude for pushing above the readings?

Gary.

The bit your missing Gary is that a spot reading on the white leg only gives a correct reading just for the white leg. You need to assess the rest of the tones in the scene and adjust exposure accordingly. If you take readings from the white leg and the darkest area where you want to show detail, you'll find that the difference is actually a lot more than the 2 stops Ed suggests you open up.

Opening up two stops will reveal some shadow detail without blowing the whites. Try it!

[EdBray]

Sorry for being a complete noob here :D Lets pretend I only want to retain leg detail on the white leg for a second. Forfeit the rest of the photo. If the meter says use 1/60 and f4, why would I add 2 stops?

Sorry I am obviously failing to grasp the concepts here :D Thanks for helping out.

Gary.

Because the meter thinks you are aiming it at a mid tone, so the white leg will come out grey, yes it will retain detail but you will have lost detail in the shadows.

Most DSLRs have a normal dynamic range of about 7 stops if you imagine that the mid point is zone 5 then the lightest area in which you should retain detail should be on zone 7 and the darkest area in which you should retain detail should be zone 3 the other two zones 8 and 2 will give you white with no detail andblack with no detail.

If you take a spot reading from the dogs white leg and open up the exposure by 2 stops as suggested you will move what the meter thinks as a mid tone to the correct placement and you should still retain detail, by doing this, you should also retain detail in the black of the dogs fur.

Have a go, it ain't costing you anything for a change :p

[68lbs]

What an interesting thread... top marks for this one Gary. I think it's important to have a sound technical understanding regardless of how creative you are, in order to get the best out of your photography.

This is my limited understanding...

The light meter ALWAYS thinks you are pointing it at something 18% grey. So, if you meter something white then what was white, will be exposed to come out 18% grey. So you need to 'over expose' to get the white coming out white.

Did I get that right?

[EdinburghGary]

Off to try :D

[EdBray]

What an interesting thread... top marks for this one Gary. I think it's important to have a sound technical understanding regardless of how creative you are, in order to get the best out of your photography.

This is my limited understanding...

The light meter ALWAYS thinks you are pointing it at something 18% grey. So, if you meter something white then what was white, will be exposed to come out 18% grey. So you need to 'over expose' to get the white coming out white.

Did I get that right?

Pretty much, but you are not over exposing, you are just adjusting the exposure to place the correct tone in the right place on the exposure curve.

[EdinburghGary]

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/4425/93110188.jpg

Metered off leg, PLUS two stops :D

Mind boggling. You guys are awesome :)

Tip of tail JUST started to clip, a TINY section.

[EdinburghGary]

Normally, in a landscape I would meter off cliff face, tree, field, anything greenish, or light brownish. I would normally chuck a grad on for the sky, without checking what was required.

This is all gonna have to change :D

Gary.

[CT]

Way cool. If you understand what's happened Gary - the spot meter in your first shot considered the white leg to be 18 % grey so reproduced it somewhat darker than you'd like it to be, and the rest of the darker tones waaaay under-exposed. Obviously you now have quite a bit of latitude to increase the exposure without blowing the whites, which is usually the main consideration. Metering off a highlight is a useful way of metering providing you make the mental adjustment.

Another one to try is to meter off a highlight and again off the darkest part where you want to show some shadow detail. This should give you 2 spots on your hand held meter scale a few stops apart. Drop your exposure in the middle of those two readings and you shouldn't be far away.

[EdinburghGary]

Way cool. If you understand what's happened Gary - the spot meter in your first shot considered the white leg to be 18 % grey so reproduced it somewhat darker than you'd like it to be, and the rest of the darker tones waaaay under-exposed. Obviously you now have quite a bit of latitude to increase the exposure without blowing the whites, which is usually the main consideration. Metering off a highlight is a useful way of metering providing you make the mental adjustment.

Another one to try is to meter off a highlight and again off the darkest part where you want to show some shadow detail. This should give you 2 spots on your hand held meter scale a few stops apart. Drop your exposure in the middle of those two readings and you shouldn't be far away.


Thanks mate, I am gonna play with it lots on Holiday...talking of which, I have 4 camera bags to pack, tonight, and a dog cage to collect, tonight.

:help:

[EdBray]

Metered off leg, PLUS two stops :D


;)

Mind boggling. You guys are awesome :)


:thumbs: I'm going to bed now whilst my head can still fit through the door

Tip of tail JUST started to clip, a TINY section.

Well, guess where you should have metered from then? The brightest part in which you wanted to retain detail. Then open up 2 stops and bobs your auntie (cept he uses Canon :p )

[irw1]

From someone with less experience, but a rough understanding, I just wanted to say this is a great thread imo - top advice from some very knowledgeable people, and I'm sure many more bods will benefit from reading/seeing this thread. :thumbs:

Kudos to you all. :clap:

[HoppyUK]

Reading tonight's goings on, I'm not sure if these comments are helpful, but I hope they are.

Metering technique for negative film is quite different to transparencies, and digital is slightly different again (but similar to trannies). With negs you can adjust the final tone range in the print, which makes a fundamental difference. You can't with trannies. With digital there is some scope to adjust the final result if you shoot Raw, which is a bit of highlight headroom which can be exploited with the 'expose to the right' technique. (JPEGs are just like transparency film exposure-wise.)

Different films have different dynamic range. 7 stops is a rule of thumb. Generally, the higher the ISO, the shorter the range, and it's the shadow end which suffers.

Spot metering is generally most appropriate to shooting negs, in two ways: 1) point it at an area and it will translate the reading into an exposure that will nail that tone to 18% grey on the film. With neg film, this will give you maximum exposure latitude either side, which will then give you an optimum print. This is hopeless for tranny film or digital, unless the area you've chosen happens to be 18% grey. 2) Choose the brightest important highlight area, and the darkest important shadow, and the spot meter will tell you the range between them. If it's within 7-stops, you're okay. Set your exposure mid-way and you should get the lot. If it's outside 7-stops, you've got to choose which way to compromise.

A shorthand version of 2) is to spot read the important highlight, and just add two stops. This usually works (with all film and digital) because highlights are more important than shadows and if you've got the brightest area pinned to the top of the tone curve, everything else will just hang off it.

Shooting transparencies or digital JPEG, an incident reading is the best, and there is little room for manoeuvre - maybe half a stop according to preference. Digital Raw has some highlight headroom, about one stop, according to camera model.

The spot meter doesn't know if the tone it's seeing is light or dark, only you know that. And using experience, you know where you want that brightness area to sit on the tone curve.

This is quite in-depth theory. Understanding is important, but due to inherant inaccuracies in the system, it is extremely difficult to operate with any dgreee of precision greater than plus/minus 25% at best. There is only ever one optimum exposure setting (depending on recording medium) and it makes no difference how this is calculated.

[EdinburghGary]

Reading tonight's goings on, I'm not sure if these comments are helpful, but I hope they are.

Metering technique for negative film is quite different to transparencies, and digital is slightly different again (but similar to trannies). With negs you can adjust the final tone range in the print, which makes a fundamental difference. You can't with trannies. With digital there is some scope to adjust the final result if you shoot Raw, which is a bit of highlight headroom which can be exploited with the 'expose to the right' technique. (JPEGs are just like transparency film exposure-wise.)

Different films have different dynamic range. 7 stops is a rule of thumb. Generally, the higher the ISO, the shorter the range, and it's the shadow end which suffers.

Spot metering is generally most appropriate to shooting negs, in two ways: 1) point it at an area and it will translate the reading into an exposure that will nail that tone to 18% grey on the film. With neg film, this will give you maximum exposure latitude either side, which will then give you an optimum print. This is hopeless for tranny film or digital, unless the area you've chosen happens to be 18% grey. 2) Choose the brightest important highlight area, and the darkest important shadow, and the spot meter will tell you the range between them. If it's within 7-stops, you're okay. Set your exposure mid-way and you should get the lot. If it's outside 7-stops, you've got to choose which way to compromise.

A shorthand version of 2) is to spot read the important highlight, and just add two stops. This usually works (with all film and digital) because highlights are more important than shadows and if you've got the brightest area pinned to the top of the tone curve, everything else will just hang off it.

Shooting transparencies or digital JPEG, an incident reading is the best, and there is little room for manoeuvre - maybe half a stop according to preference. Digital Raw has some highlight headroom, about one stop, according to camera model.

The spot meter doesn't know if the tone it's seeing is light or dark, only you know that. And using experience, you know where you want that brightness area to sit on the tone curve.

This is quite in-depth theory. Understanding is important, but due to inherant inaccuracies in the system, it is extremely difficult to operate with any dgreee of precision greater than plus/minus 25% at best. There is only ever one optimum exposure setting (depending on recording medium) and it makes no difference how this is calculated.


It makes a lot of sense, where I think this is going to get complicated, is when I add filters into the mix.

Taking your example, lets say I have a bright sky which I want to keep detail in. So bright, that I need a 3 stop ND.

Now, I don't use my handheld meter through the ND, I am guessing what I would do, is meter as you suggested, but instead of adding 2 stops, I would add 5 stops (the original 2, and the compensation for the ND filter)?

I read somewhere that the inside of Lowerpro Bags are the 18% gray. Could I use this to my advantage?

Gary.

[HoppyUK]

It makes a lot of sense, where I think this is going to get complicated, is when I add filters into the mix.

Taking your example, lets say I have a bright sky which I want to keep detail in. So bright, that I need a 3 stop ND.

Now, I don't use my handheld meter through the ND, I am guessing what I would do, is meter as you suggested, but instead of adding 2 stops, I would add 5 stops (the original 2, and the compensation for the ND filter)?

I read somewhere that the inside of Lowerpro Bags are the 18% gray. Could I use this to my advantage?

Gary.

Hi Gary, I think you've got it :) The example of the grad is a good one. Yes, you would effectively meter the sky separately and depending how bright it was above the level of the main scene, decide what strength of grad to use. And then you can vary the effect of the grad with f/number also (higher f/number pulls the dark line down quicker and harder).

The Lowepro bag thing is interesting. Mine certainly looks like 18% grey but I've never heard Lowepro claim this to be so. I guess because they can't guarantee it. I used it the other day with a long lens and water birds - the auto exposure was going all over the place - so I set manual (as you would anyway for this) and put my bag down wide open a few yards away. As the sun was in and out, I kept pointing my lens down at the bag to check that I was still on course. It worked fine, but there are other similar ways of keeping tabs on this which are just as easy/easier.

On this kind of thing, I think you will find it helpful to get an 18% grey card that you can use for metering, and also a grey scale and a colour bar (Kodak). When doing a set, shoot one with them in frame for reference - very interesting and handy guide. A grey scale would be a perfect subject to include your exposure experiments earlier, proped up on the sofa. BTW, I also have a Cavalier King Charles on the sofa, she's 15 bless her.

[EdinburghGary]

Hoppy thanks for all help, in my kip now as leaving for Mull in 4 hours.

Let's see photos of doggy!!! 15 is an excellent CAV age.

Gary.