How to meter at zoom Distances without on board meter ?

I have no place here, but as I was passing by...

Buy a pocket camera with a long zoom - take a reading from that

...bye!!
 
O.k without risking causing some more interesting discussion how would I use a gray card ? My original thought was something which occurred the other day whilst out with my dogs, I was standing in a field in bright sun light and a particularly large Buzzard flew over and landed in a dead tree near the edge of a wooded area with steep rising land behind it, this in comparison to where I was standing was relatively dark so me using my Weston 2 meter would only get a reading from where I was standing and exposure of the subject would be way out. This as I said was only theoretical as I don't have zoom lens to fit my unmetered camera anyway but was wondering how it would have been done when most cameras were like this. I fully admit to being inexperienced otherwise I wouldn't be asking the question.
 
Last edited:
dancook said:
I have no place here, but as I was passing by...

Buy a pocket camera with a long zoom - take a reading from that

...bye!!
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea as with a large zoom maybe you could camera meter off areas of green grass (in the distance which is in the sunshine)......well that is roughly Kodak grey and the film's latitude would cover it. Problem would be if the grass is wet and sun at an angle which wouldn't guarantee a correct reading.
 
BADGER.BRAD said:
O.k without risking causing some more interesting discussion how would I use a gray card ? My original thought was something which occurred the other day whilst out with my dogs, I was standing in a field in bright sun light and a particularly large Buzzard flew over and landed in a dead tree near the edge of a wooded area with steep rising land behind it, this in comparison to where I was standing was relatively dark so me using my Weston 2 meter would only get a reading from where I was standing and exposure of the subject would be way out. This as I said was only theoretical as I don't have zoom lens to fit my unmetered camera anyway but was wondering how it would have been done when most cameras were like this. I fully admit to being inexperienced otherwise I wouldn't be asking the question.
Click to expand...

Well in quick situations (the bird might fly away) all you can do is open or close the lens a couple of stops (or more)..well that is if you all ready know what the exposure reading is in sunshine (or shadow). In tests on the net you can over expose film by 6 stops and still get a picture but under-exposure is more of a problem.

http://petapixel.com/2015/08/10/how-much-can-you-overexpose-negative-film-have-a-look/
 
Last edited:
If you use a grey card you have to meter from it. So you'd have a meter anyway.

As I said, buy a camera with a meter.

It'll stop the children fighting at least
 
GreenNinja67 said:
If you use a grey card you have to meter from it. So you'd have a meter anyway.

As I said, buy a camera with a meter.

It'll stop the children fighting at least
Click to expand...

..or at a last resort sunny sixteen (I'd make that sunny 12)...in the old days inside the film box it told you what to set lens aperture for... sunny, cloudy etc
 
It is somewhat amusing to read these posts. in the 40's aged 10 I got my first camera and had to find out about shutter speeds apertures and how to set exposures.
The AP and BJP often discussed exposure as we are now,, with equally divergent views and the rare glimpses of sanity.
My first means of exposure calculation was to use the table printed in side the film cartons.
I then Bought a Johnsons dial exposure calculator, where you dialled in the time of day. the month the latitude and weather conditions (this was surprisingly accurate as it was arriving at the power of the sun in those conditions, albeit may be filtered through an overcast sky)
Next on my list was a photopia Extinction meter, based on a wax spot photometer but with none of the calibration. A quite hopeless device.
I then went Electric and bought a MiniRex2 selenium meter. and like the posts here had to learn how to get acceptable results with it.
At college I bought a weston Master 2 which was followed by each model up to a Euro master.
The break through came soon after the Weston 2 as I got an import licence to buy a Norwood super director Incident Light meter from the USA.( though made at that time by Waltz in Japan. Norwood later licensed Sekonik to make the range of incident meters we see to day. Though none were ever as sophisticated as the Walts version, which was made under a personal patent owned by Norwood himself. (I still own that original meter but It has been superseded by their latest model)
The most accurate Meter that I owned was a SEI photometer marketed by Ilford. It was also the most complex, but could take accurate comparative readings from the brightest studio lights to black cats on moon less nights.

I have been fortunate to see the whole gamut of meters in my working life and have used virtually all of them.
However for convenience nothing compares to that in the modern digital camera, that reads every single pixel of an image and used complex algorithms to arrive at its exposure setting.
That is, combined with the Histogram and Blinkies. they supply all the information you could possibly need.......EXCEPT
when it comes to studio flash, nothing compares to an incident light flash/ambient meter . for well balanced exposures.
 
Last edited:
GreenNinja67 said:
If you use a grey card you have to meter from it. So you'd have a meter anyway.

As I said, buy a camera with a meter.

It'll stop the children fighting at least
Click to expand...

A substantial fraction of decent medium format film cameras don't have in-built meters, or if they do, they are in prism finders that add quite a bit to the already substantial weight.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
My first means of exposure calculation was to use the table printed in side the film cartons.
Click to expand...

Mine too, I didn't have any kind of meter for the first 4 years of using my first camera, just used the info on the boxes (essentially Sunny 16). There are certainly plenty of shots from that time where the exposure was out, but I got some decent results from the Inner Hebrides to the Balkans and the Aegean. I rather wish they'd print that info on the film boxes again!
 
ChrisR said:
A substantial fraction of decent medium format film cameras don't have in-built meters, or if they do, they are in prism finders that add quite a bit to the already substantial weight.
Click to expand...

Having owned a Mamiya C330 kit in the past I realize this.

The OP wanted to know how to expose without a meter in the camera. Perhaps my response should have been buy a meter or a camera with one in.
 
If I'm in different light than a distant subject and want to use my incident meter, I do one of three things:

1. Get myself into the same light. I may not be able to reach the subject easily (a distant mountain), but I can often reach somewhere where the light falling on it is the same (50 yards down the road).

2. If I'm in a sunny area and the subject is in shade, I just shade the bulb with my hand.

3. If I'm in a shaded area and the subject is brightly lit, I know there will be a three to four stop difference, so I'd just guesstimate and err on the side of over-exposure if using negative film, or bracket if using slide film. Study this chart for a while. Almost all daylight photography is going to fall in the range of EV11 to EV16, so there's not a lot to remember: http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm#Light Intensity Chart

Edit: with negative film, you often want to meter for the shadows. So a standard incident meter reading in your shady spot will probably give you a good exposure of the distant sunny object.
 
Last edited:
GreenNinja67 said:
Having owned a Mamiya C330 kit in the past I realize this.

The OP wanted to know how to expose without a meter in the camera. Perhaps my response should have been buy a meter or a camera with one in.
Click to expand...

How is your response helpful? If someone posted asking how to fix a problem with a piece of equipment and you respond suggesting to just buy a new one, that isn't adding to the discussion nor is it helpful.
 
As an aside: using an incident meter and a camera that uses EV values (Rolleicord Vb and Hasselblad 503 in my case) teaches you a lot about light. It simplifies things by removing the complication of separate shutter speeds and apertures, because you're only looking at a single number. When I was in Iceland last, I mostly had Ektar 100 loaded in my Hasselblad and almost every meter reading was in the range of 11 to 13. After two days, the missus and I could guess the level of the light to within half a stop almost every time!
 
Craigus said:
How is your response helpful? If someone posted asking how to fix a problem with a piece of equipment and you respond suggesting to just buy a new one, that isn't adding to the discussion nor is it helpful.
Click to expand...


You're absolutely right Craig.

I've added as much useful information to this thread as you have in this post.
 
FujiLove said:
almost every meter reading was in the range of 11 to 13. After two days, the missus and I could guess the level of the light to within half a stop almost every time!
Click to expand...

So 12 was a safe guess?!

This is not a dig but just amused me. :D
 
GreenNinja67 said:
You're absolutely right Craig.

I've added as much useful information to this thread as you have in this post.
Click to expand...

Some people seem to make a habit of posting in threads even though they have nothing to contribute and do so in an almost antagonistic way. If only there was a word for it...

In any case I think they should be called out for it.
 
On a sunny day and using a digital camera. As you move your view around the scene, or Zoom, You notice that the exposure keeps changing as it is influenced by the brightness of the various bit of subject matter that are included. However as the scene is in constant mix of sunlight and shadows, the exposure should remain the same, to correctly capture a full range those tones in the image. it is this pegging of the tonal range that gives the superior results of an Incident meter.

However, saying that... Exposing to the right gives the exception. as It captures not the "Correct" exposure, but one which capture the maximum tonal range with out burning out the highlights. It does this by shifting all the captured tones to the right. This repositioning of the tones is then corrected in raw processing to bring the mid grey back into position.

A correctly used incident meter also pegs the mid grey to its correct position, but it does this by measuring the total light falling on the subject. It may however clip the highlights when used with high contrast film that has a restricted tonal range. When used with Transparency film, the film speed that you use, will ensure that this will not be the case.
 
Craigus said:
So 12 was a safe guess?!

This is not a dig but just amused me. :D
Click to expand...

when medium and high speed Black and white film or negative colour film is used, that is true.
It is a fact made use of by a majority of simple and box cameras, that have no means of altering the exposure.
such change in the density of the negatives that this produces, is Easily accommodated in the printing stage.
 
Craigus said:
Some people seem to make a habit of posting in threads even though they have nothing to contribute and do so in an almost antagonistic way. If only there was a word for it...

In any case I think they should be called out for it.
Click to expand...

Pot kettle
 
Bill Cook said:
From my limited grasp of what I (and I guess the OP) are wanting to measure here, I would have thought that it was the amount of light actually reflected from a distant subject that was the important thing???
Click to expand...
In theory, an incident reading isn't significantly different from a matrix/average TTL reading... it is for the scene overall and not for a specific item/subject w/in a scene. This also correlates to the "set it and forget it" manual exposure which is correct for mid tones (mid grey) and therefore it is correct for everything else.

But in the end, metering is just metering regardless of how you go about it... it's going to attempt to tell you the exposure for mid grey. But if done wrong the results will be wrong. And if done correctly, the results may not be what you want creatively.
 
BADGER.BRAD said:
O.k without risking causing some more interesting discussion how would I use a gray card ?
Click to expand...
Well, your Weston doesn't have a spot/reflectance mode per-se, but you could take a reflectance reading off of a grey card and get close enough. But it wouldn't help you in the situation you mention.

In fact, no method of metering would necessarily help you... it's just not that smart.
 
sk66 said:
In theory, an incident reading isn't significantly different from a matrix/average TTL reading... it is for the scene overall and not for a specific item/subject w/in a scene. This also correlates to the "set it and forget it" manual exposure which is correct for mid tones (mid grey) and therefore it is correct for everything else.

But in the end, metering is just metering regardless of how you go about it... it's going to attempt to tell you the exposure for mid grey. But if done wrong the results will be wrong. And if done correctly, the results may not be what you want creatively.
Click to expand...

Hi Steve,

Not so sure I agree fully with your last paragraph but I think I understand what you're saying.

There are two types of metering:

Reflected - when light falls on a subject part of that light is reflected and is how our eyes are able to see objects. Darker subjects reflect less light than brighter subjects. Camera meters use reflected light from the subject and average the scene out to an 18 percent grey. If the scene isn't average (eg snow scene) the camera will meter incorrectly and you have grey snow.

Incident metering - most hand meters have this function and do not average anything. They meter the light 'falling' on the subject so if you have positioned the meter correctly whilst taking the reading the whites stay white and blacks black - no need for any exposure compensation. There is absolutely no need to use a grey card with an incident meter.

Incident meter readings are 'difficult' to fool and are more accurate.
 
Last edited:
Fraser Euan White said:
Hi Steve,

Not so sure I agree fully with your last paragraph but I think I understand what you're saying.

There are two types of metering:

Reflected - when light falls on a subject part of that light is reflected and is how our eyes are able to see objects. Darker subjects reflect less light than brighter subjects. Camera meters use reflected light from the subject and average the scene out to an 18 percent grey. If the scene isn't average (eg snow scene) the camera will meter incorrectly and you have grey snow.

Incident metering - most hand meters have this function and do not average anything. They meter the light 'falling' on the subject so if you have positioned the meter correctly whilst taking the reading the whites stay white and blacks black - no need for any exposure compensation. There is absolutely no need to use a grey card with an incident meter.

Incident meter readings are 'difficult' to fool and are more accurate.
Click to expand...


Camera makers would love to be able to incorporate Incident meters in their cameras.
Unfortunately an incident meter requires the dome to be pointed from the subject position towards the camera position.
For that reason alone they will always be a hand held accessory.

Some old cameras like the retina range and a few zeiss models included a hinged white diffuser on their meters. The entire camera could then be turned and used as an incident light meter.
 
Last edited:
Anyway - back to the OP's initial ''theoretical' question:

The post is in the f&c section - people have to remember that they will logically question and think 'who would use a camera without a meter?'. Please appreciate some of just love using old cameras and the enjoyment of the hobby comes from 'tinkering' around before we press the shutter.

I have come across the scenario the OP mentions many times - using a long lens to photograph village cricket matches. I'm in the sun photographing the game when an interesting candid takes place in the shaded area of the pavilion.

Here is what I do and works well. I have a handheld meter that has a spot metering function. I take an incident meter reading from where I am and this covers the exposure for the playing field.
I then take a spot meter reading (reflective) from from something white in the shaded pavilion area and add two stops of exposure to this reading to ensure it stays white (just like you would do for a snow scene & exposure compensation).This negates the need to guess 18 percent grey.

There will be X number of stops difference between the incidence light reading and my spot reading - I remember this difference so I can quickly change exposure between the two as the game evolves. I take incident meter readings quite regularly but always keep the same exposure difference between the scenes.

It may not be the 'correct' way but works well for me.
 
Last edited:
Intrigued by what camera you are using. Digitals offer different metering options, spot, evaluative, centre-weighted etc. You have exposure compensation. You can bracket. You can shoot raw. If you are worried about some bits of the scene being under or over exposed by the reading, take several at different exposures and combine in software. I am not sure what all the fuss is about?
 
Last edited:
Photodiva said:
Intrigued by what camera you are using. Digitals offer different metering options, spot, evaluative, centre-weighted etc. You have exposure compensation. You can bracket. You can shoot raw. If you are worried about some bits of the scene being under or over exposed by the reading, take several at different exposures and combine in software. I am not sure what all the fuss is about?
Click to expand...


Precisely my point which appeared to evade some.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Incident metering - most hand meters have this function and do not average anything. They meter the light 'falling' on the subject so if you have positioned the meter correctly whilst taking the reading the whites stay white and blacks black - no need for any exposure compensation. There is absolutely no need to use a grey card with an incident meter.

Incident meter readings are 'difficult' to fool and are more accurate.
Click to expand...
In general I would agree, and that is the same as the "manual exposure" mindset... Do you really want the black bear in shadow to record as nothing but a black blob? Do you really want the white dress in bright light to record as white with little detail?

I have seen numerous times where incorrectly using a hand held meter could lead to poor results (dome or no dome?, towards the camera or towards the light?, incident or spot?, etc)... but for the general/overall an incident reading can be very effective and easy to use... just as manual exposure settings can be.

Terrywoodenpic said:
Camera makers would love to be able to incorporate Incident meters in their cameras.
Unfortunately an incident meter requires the dome to be pointed from the subject position towards the camera position.
For that reason alone they will always be a hand held accessory.
Click to expand...

I have a couple cheapo "white dome" WB lens caps... they work just fine for setting a custom WB and for converting the camera into an incident meter. I have to offset (increase) the indicated exposure by 2 stops, but it is consistent and reliable (w/ camera set to matrix/average metering). Not that I have frequent cause to use them...
 
Last edited:
Photodiva said:
Intrigued by what camera you are using. Digitals offer different metering options, spot, evaluative, centre-weighted etc. You have exposure compensation. You can bracket. You can shoot raw. If you are worried about some bits of the scene being under or over exposed by the reading, take several at different exposures and combine in software. I am not sure what all the fuss is about?
Click to expand...

As we are in film and conventional and the title says a camera with no light meter, I'd guess your digital camera reference has no meaning ! ( I guess this is just an over sight on your part)

The camera is a late 60's to mid 70's Praktica PL Nova L
 
Photodiva said:
Intrigued by what camera you are using. Digitals offer different metering options, spot, evaluative, centre-weighted etc. You have exposure compensation. You can bracket. You can shoot raw. If you are worried about some bits of the scene being under or over exposed by the reading, take several at different exposures and combine in software. I am not sure what all the fuss is about?
Click to expand...

I have a 10x8 camera. There is no built in meter. Black and white film costs £130 for 25 sheets. Yes, I could bracket - but I wouldn't. Bracketing implies you don't know what you're doing - or have no confidence in your ability. None of the clever metering systems are foolproof and work every time - if they did, there would only be one as the others wouldn't be needed. It is possible to combine images in the darkroom, so yes, that's possible - but it's much easier, simpler and less fuss to just get the exposure and development right first time.
 
Last edited:
Where’s @Teflon-Mike when you need him to give a full 27 page explanation. It least it would stop all the bickering and fatuous irelavent comments ;)
 
I am considering making my own reply, but in all honesty the subject is so very simple that any answer would be an anticlimax. I've seen whole books devoted to obfuscation to make a simple subject complex; the older books are complex in the degree of theory that they go into, but the end result is pleasingly simple. At least, for outdoor, natural light photography.

OK - here's a method that I was taught in the 1960s; it's never failed me whether it's in the Yorkshire Dales, the Swiss Alps (not a lot of difference, really - see Betty's) or even darkest Norfolk. If the subject in in sunshine, stick the palm of your hand in sunshine, take a reflected reading from it and open up one stop. On the other hand (pun intended) if the subject is in shadow, put the palm of your hand in shadow, take a reflected reading and open up one stop.

Pace those whose regard an incident reading as necessarily involving a plastic disk, but this method measures the light falling not the light reflected, and is subject independent. It will only fail if there are deep shadows that would be underexposed, although in real life I haven't yet met them.
 
Photodiva said:
Intrigued by what camera you are using. Digitals offer different metering options, spot, evaluative, centre-weighted etc. You have exposure compensation. You can bracket. You can shoot raw. If you are worried about some bits of the scene being under or over exposed by the reading, take several at different exposures and combine in software. I am not sure what all the fuss is about?
Click to expand...

GreenNinja67 said:
Precisely my point which appeared to evade some.
Click to expand...

Did the section of the forum this is in evade both of you?
 
On exposure in general....

Let's imagine I want to take a perfect photograph of a grey card. What exposure do I need? Well, actually, I don't need to worry about trivia like how much light there is, or even what the speed of the film is. I can give any exposure from 10 minutes at f/1.2 to 1/8000the second at f/128 and still produce a perfect print. For the simple reason that no matter what the density of the negative, you can always print it to any desired shade of grey (or black, or white). It's only when you have more tones that you need to worry.

The principle continues with more shades of grey. Provided that the exposure isn't such that you can no longer differentiate the tones - they they all lie in the middle - the print will be fine. That's the basis of exposure latitude. The only problems arise if the tonal range is extreme, and that's where a spot meter can tell you exactly what your tonal range is. Only if it falls outside a pretty wide limit do you need to worry about altering development. And only if the shadows are unusually deep do you need to worry if you're pegging the highlights with an incident reading or a palm of the hand approach.

It's more difficuly if you're wet printing, because the darkroom process and papers are less forgiving (more limited tonal ranges can be accomodated). But for those who scan and print, it's all very much plain sailing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top