Light meters for natural light portrait

ferjphoto

ferjphoto

Messages
68
Edit My Images
No
Currently looking at doing natural light portraits (for fun not business), and considering whether a light meter would be a good investment. I might in the future also move into off camera flash, but not for a while.

I know that cameras have metering etc but I'd like to get it right in shot as much as possible ie using custom white balance/grey card, so is a light meter a sensible idea or not. Also are there any budget ones for under £50?
 
Are you really sure you need a separate meter?

The prices have been increasing a bit over the last few years - and I think that's the effect of a shrinking market.

I have a Sekonic 308S that I acquired a few years ago. It has been useful but is not critical. I tend to find that I use it for quick flash setup when taking portraits/groups of family and friends - and it is used outside occasionally for incident readings.

But I don't think of it as a critical bit of kit. And if I forgot to take it or broke or got lost then it's not something I'd be that that concerned about.

£50 might get you a used one.
 
There’s 3 separate questions here so:

1: Are you currently struggling to get good exposures using your in camera meter?

If so; a handheld meter might help (but I reckon if you can’t learn what your camera meters doing, you’ll not necessarily do any better with a handheld).

2: Flash is a slightly different matter, but depending on what you’re shooting, digital makes them less essential than they were with f. I have one, never use it.

3: White balance isn’t measured using an exposure meter, you can buy a colour meter, but again they’re not considered essential except in some very specialist areas.

As far as cost; new flash / ambient meters start around £200. If you’re smart you couldget one for £50 s/h
 
Thanks Phil.

No I'm not struggling, I can use spot metering, manual mode etc I guess my thinking was trying to get best accuracy.

I don't think I explained myself properly, I realise white balance isn't metering and is about colour (I have a lastolite grey card for that) and so I'm trying to start with the most accurate colour and exposure in camera. I just wasn't sure if a light meter was worth the investment at this point, which I think you probably have answered for me!
 
Without wishing to open a can of worms...

Exposure can't be accurate, it's subjective.

Likewise colour temperature; whilst it's possible to always shoot to create a perfectly neutral colour balance, it's rarely what you want to do to render an image the way you're seeing it.
 
Rides and Rambles said:
Currently looking at doing natural light portraits (for fun not business), and considering whether a light meter would be a good investment. I might in the future also move into off camera flash, but not for a while.

I know that cameras have metering etc but I'd like to get it right in shot as much as possible ie using custom white balance/grey card, so is a light meter a sensible idea or not. Also are there any budget ones for under £50?
Click to expand...

You certainly don't 'need' a hand meter. There is nothing you can do with one that can't be done by other means with digital, often more accurately and more easily.

Or do you 'want' a hand meter? Some people seem to enjoy the process of using one, maybe it makes you look professional, or maybe it's just an old habit. You may struggle to get a decent Sekonic 308 for £50

You should definitely use a grey card though, and provided that is a) 18% mid-grey, and b) properly neutral in colour, it will give you both technically accurate exposure and colour balance.
 
I worked without a meter for many years. To begin with, I couldn't afford one and later I didn't see the need. I started out when every roll of film came in a little box that either contained a sheet of paper with exposure advice or had the same printed on the inside of the box. I'm not boasting when I say that I never had an unprintable negative. It was thanks to those little tables.

These days I can still look at any outdoor and most indoor scenes then tell you the exposure, correct to half a stop. Of course, all my cameras now have automatic exposure as an option and they are always more accurate than me. That being the case, an external meter seems a tad redundant. :naughty:
 
Just to add, if you’re really desperate for a try.

As the Sekonic L308 is the de-facto cheap meter on the current market, it oddly pushes up their popularity second hand.

You can get an older, better Minolta flash meter for less money, probably other models too.
 
I do use a meter a fair amount of the time for fill-in flash to get me to the fill ratio I like but of course I could just chimp and forget about it. It might take me longer but would achieve the same effect.
 
moomike said:
I love my light meters and even though I don't use them every time, I wouldn't be without them. If I'm using the zone system for my scene, then it's a massive help as my spot meter is a lot more accurate than my camera. It's not a 100% essential thing, but I do use mine a lot.
Click to expand...

I recall being out shooting a few years back where someone was using a very expensive spot-meter for the Zone technique. I just pointed my camera at the scene and we were 1/2 stop different = effectively the same

It seems pointless to me to do anything but make sure the highlights aren't clipped (unless that really doesn't matter) and let the rest just rely on the huge DR we've all got now

So its Blinkies all the way for me :)

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
I recall being out shooting a few years back where someone was using a very expensive spot-meter for the Zone technique. I just pointed my camera at the scene and we were 1/2 stop different = effectively the same

It seems pointless to me to do anything but make sure the highlights aren't clipped (unless that really doesn't matter) and let the rest just rely on the huge DR we've all got now

So its Blinkies all the way for me :)

Dave
Click to expand...
Fair enough mate, horses for courses :) I concur that blinkies are useful - I just dislike using them (am spoiled by mirrorless now :))

I also get a lot of use out of mine when I'm teaching - it's entirely subjective, but I shoot a lot of film too, so it feels like a part of the process.
 
"Make sure the highlights aren't clipped" - well yes if using Digital or Transparency but Shadows for Print Film.

I tend to use a Grey Card where the Subject is and use on camera Meter these days. They're very accurate now I only use my Light meter for Flash photography nowadays when I'm using my Non TTL Stuff.
 
chivers67 said:
"Make sure the highlights aren't clipped" - well yes if using Digital or Transparency but Shadows for Print Film.

I tend to use a Grey Card where the Subject is and use on camera Meter these days. They're very accurate now I only use my Light meter for Flash photography nowadays when I'm using my Non TTL Stuff.
Click to expand...
It is fairly difficult to see the blinkies using neg film though ;)
 
if you can use manual just do your adjustments there
look at the shot and adjust shutter or aperture to get YOUR desired effect
simples
what camera and lens are you using ??
 
Back when I was using film I used an incident meter, always. It's just the way I worked. These days I still carry a little Sekonic 308, but with the dynamic range and post-processing capabilities we have available, I don't use it much.

Still, there are times when I take an incident reading, or more commonly, wish I'd have taken an incident reading when I got to post. Incident readings measure the light falling on the subject. Everything else measures the reflection of the light and there are a lot of variables in reflected light.

Might be hard to find a good incident meter for <$50, but old Minolta Autometers can be found in the $70-80 range, and frankly, I think they're still better than the new little Sekonics.

DG Phototraining said:
I recall being out shooting a few years back where someone was using a very expensive spot-meter for the Zone technique. I just pointed my camera at the scene and we were 1/2 stop different = effectively the same
Click to expand...

Whole different game there. With the zone system, you take reflected spot readings (plural) to determine the dynamic range of the scene. You take a reading off the darkest shadows and another for the brightest highlights. Exposure is based on the dark reading to make sure you're getting shadow detail.

Film development is the second part of the zone system and is based on the difference between the shadows and the highlights. The goal is to stretch or compress the dynamic range of the scene to fit the dynamic range of film; usually 9 stops or 9 zones. If the scene only has 7 stops of DR, overdevelop to add contrast. 11 stops, underdevelop to bring the highlights in line.

The zone system is about making a perfect negative and exposure is only half that puzzle.
 
If you're patient on ebay, you can quite often get a Gossen Sixtomat Digital or Sixtomat Flash (not to be confused with their similarly named analogue ancestors) for around £50 (more like £90 if you're in a hurry).

Of course real men (or women) buy a 70 year old pre-ASA Weston Master II selenium meter and convert Weston stops to ISO in their heads...
 
Reading this thread has given me an almost unbearable nostalgia for my young days when my friend and I were jointly learning about photography and all the information we had available was from Amateur Photographer ( "Armchair Pornographer" as we called it )

We used to read the back ads for Mr Cad selling second-hand enlargers etc. I remember the excitement of the very first roll of film I developed and the amazement of seeing the negatives. I saw my very first print appearing in the dish under the red glow of the darkroom light and it was magical. Sometimes, if we were feeling adventurous and the Scottish weather was kind, we'd buy a roll of Kodachrome 64 and wander off down the riverbank. I never produced anything great but what fun we had.

There's a lot more to photography than taking pictures.
 
drsilver said:
Whole different game there. With the zone system, you take reflected spot readings (plural) to determine the dynamic range of the scene. You take a reading off the darkest shadows and another for the brightest highlights. Exposure is based on the dark reading to make sure you're getting shadow detail.

Film development is the second part of the zone system and is based on the difference between the shadows and the highlights. The goal is to stretch or compress the dynamic range of the scene to fit the dynamic range of film; usually 9 stops or 9 zones. If the scene only has 7 stops of DR, overdevelop to add contrast. 11 stops, underdevelop to bring the highlights in line.

The zone system is about making a perfect negative and exposure is only half that puzzle.
Click to expand...

As interesting as this is I'm not sure what it adds to the point that the guy I was with, who did multiple reading on a £500+ meter, still ended up at the same effective exposure a normal camera did

My take on your nicely clear explanation is that I'm just glad I don't shoot film :)

Dave
 
I have a lightmeter and a lightmeter app on my smartphone. However, that's because I like to use old, fully manual, film cameras that don't have any sort of built-in light meter at all. To be honest, I mostly use the lightmeter app these days as it's as accurate in most daylight situations as the hand held meter I've got.

I also have a 40 year old Canon A1 35mm SLR (with inbuilt centre weighted meter), and a Canon EOS-3 and an EOS-30v, with multizone metering systems. I don't use a separate lighmeter with any of those 35mm film cameras; I don't need to, as their inbuilt systems are more than up to the job if I use them properly. It's just a case of getting to know your camera, which is even easier to do with a digital camera than a film camera, as the results are instantly available for comparison.

Here's a natural light portrait taken with my EOS-3 on Kodak Colorplus 200 ISO print film. If a 20 year old camera can do that with cheap print film then I'm sure you'll be fine with a modern DSLR or mirrorless digital camera featuring a state of the art metering system and goodness knows how many stops of dynamic range.

 
Last edited:
I have plenty of excellent light meters that I don't use.
If I did flash portraiture I would certainly use my flash meter. But as I do not, it just sits waiting.
Digital photography has largely made meters redundant
 
DG Phototraining said:
As interesting as this is I'm not sure what it adds to the point that the guy I was with, who did multiple reading on a £500+ meter, still ended up at the same effective exposure a normal camera did

My take on your nicely clear explanation is that I'm just glad I don't shoot film :)

Dave
Click to expand...

And FWIW, mine too but as Wooster said in the post above "There's a lot more to photography than taking pictures." For a lot of people, perhaps most, the mantra that 'it's all about the image' really doesn't apply. There's a long and enjoyable process leading up to that and the fact that you (sometimes) get a nice photo at the end is a bit of a bonus.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
I have plenty of excellent light meters that I don't use.
If I did flash portraiture I would certainly use my flash meter. But as I do not, it just sits waiting.
Digital photography has largely made meters redundant
Click to expand...

Why?
 
HoppyUK said:
Why?
Click to expand...
Why, What?

Digital has largely made hand held light meters redundant.. or we would all be using them.
Flash meters do allow you to accurately and easily establish a balance between ambient and fill flash. Or between main and fill flashes. this is not a function built into cameras.

However you can use E TTL or manual for flash fill, and knock it back a bit, which works just fine out doors. but it is not entirely predictable.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Why, What?

Digital has largely made hand held light meters redundant.. or we would all be using them.
Flash meters do allow you to accurately and easily establish a balance between ambient and fill flash. Or between main and fill flashes. this is not a function built into cameras.

However you can use E TTL or manual for flash fill, and knock it back a bit, which works just fine out doors. but it is not entirely predictable.
Click to expand...

Why? Why use a hand meter for flash?

I don't see the difference and in some ways the more complex the lighting situation, eg a portrait set with three lights, the more likely the meter is to be misleading.

Example: experience says that you want the hair light to be one stop brighter than the key light, and the background light one stop darker. That has always worked well but this time your subject has big blond hair and you've chosen a darker background. When you check the image on the LCD, the hair is too bright with blinkies flashing, and the background has gone too dark and is blocked up on the left of the histogram. So what do you believe, the meter or what the camera is showing actually recorded on the sensor? Obviously the latter, in which case what was the point of metering it all in the first place?

And what if you're new to studio photography, without decades of experience with film and a hand meter? Do you really need to learn all this metering stuff and how to interpret the inevitable errors, or do you just look at the image, adjust the lights accordingly and get on with it?
 
HoppyUK said:
Why? Why use a hand meter for flash?
Click to expand...

Can't speak for others - but I have a meter for convenience. And it mainly gets used for flash setup. Probably about 8 to 10 times a year. So not heavy use.

I never much liked flash when I was younger and actively avoided it once things went digital. But I have started a long term project trying to get better shots of family and friends and gradually evolved to taking a couple of flashes with stands and modifiers when there is any kind of family gathering or formal event.

This is typically about opportunity rather than proper planning - and I have to make do with what can be done in-situ on the occasion. I have found that getting quickly setup that having a meter is really useful to zero in on getting something working - and then having settled on it take some test shots and adjust. If I can get setup quickly without fuss then I find that more of the participants will actively join in. And I tend to get more cooperation next time around.
 
HoppyUK said:
Why? Why use a hand meter for flash?

I don't see the difference and in some ways the more complex the lighting situation, eg a portrait set with three lights, the more likely the meter is to be misleading.

Example: experience says that you want the hair light to be one stop brighter than the key light, and the background light one stop darker. That has always worked well but this time your subject has big blond hair and you've chosen a darker background. When you check the image on the LCD, the hair is too bright with blinkies flashing, and the background has gone too dark and is blocked up on the left of the histogram. So what do you believe, the meter or what the camera is showing actually recorded on the sensor? Obviously the latter, in which case what was the point of metering it all in the first place?

And what if you're new to studio photography, without decades of experience with film and a hand meter? Do you really need to learn all this metering stuff and how to interpret the inevitable errors, or do you just look at the image, adjust the lights accordingly and get on with it?
Click to expand...


:clap::clap::clap: my hero :)

Dave
 
Dryce said:
Can't speak for others - but I have a meter for convenience. And it mainly gets used for flash setup. Probably about 8 to 10 times a year. So not heavy use.

I never much liked flash when I was younger and actively avoided it once things went digital. But I have started a long term project trying to get better shots of family and friends and gradually evolved to taking a couple of flashes with stands and modifiers when there is any kind of family gathering or formal event.

This is typically about opportunity rather than proper planning - and I have to make do with what can be done in-situ on the occasion. I have found that getting quickly setup that having a meter is really useful to zero in on getting something working - and then having settled on it take some test shots and adjust. If I can get setup quickly without fuss then I find that more of the participants will actively join in. And I tend to get more cooperation next time around.
Click to expand...

I think what you're saying here is that with an incident meter reading you don't need an actual subject in position to get set up and pretty much ready to go - just hold the meter where you know the subject is going to be. That obviously doesn't work if you're setting everything off the LCD/histogram/blinkies etc.

To which I would say good, totally valid :cool:

But I would also add that with modern flash equipment you can get the exposure setting done off the LCD very quickly, even down to seconds. The key to that is really the radio flash trigger and remote control unit, that can adjust all flash settings on multiple heads from the camera position. I can even do it from a smartphone. No walking back and forth to change anything and once the flash stands are set up there's no need to go near them again. Edit: this is Godox equipment, not expensive.
 
Last edited:
DG Phototraining said:
As interesting as this is I'm not sure what it adds to the point that the guy I was with, who did multiple reading on a £500+ meter, still ended up at the same effective exposure a normal camera did

My take on your nicely clear explanation is that I'm just glad I don't shoot film :)

Dave
Click to expand...

Dave you have a nice portfolio and clearly you are very good.
 
It's not really worth worrying about which is "best" or "right". I use a metre for glad braised I always have done and it works at least in part because I'm used to doing it that way. It suits me and because I'm used to it it's the easiest way.

Full disclosure: I might still adjust the exposure after I look at the results - but very rarely ;) :p

I guess I might feel differently If I had started our using blinkies or guessing or chimping or whatever. I dont feel confident or comfortable doing that though. I guess I could do it with a bit of adjustment easily enough but anywayit's not that important to me because MH way us quick and easy for me.

I also look through the viewfinder with my right eye. It would feel weird to do it with my left, but if you do it, I won't fall out with you about it :cool:
 
Last edited:
I remember one of my first cameras had an external metre to take a reading then set the camera accordingly.
Now of course it's not needed but hey, not knocking anyone who has one!
We can adjust a few stops anyway with software. :)
 
I have a Sekonic 308 also.

Unfortunately not cheap and you might be able to get a decent used meter( Gossen ? ) off ebay as suggested above.

I have had a meter of one sort or the other for decades - mainly for use with film cameras which have no or untrustworthy metering.

As well as film, I use it for incident light metering particularly for macro.

Perversely, I don’t use it for flash. I do little flash photography and what I do using off camera flashes is by trial snd error - it’s so quick and easy these days with digital.

That said, it’s nice to have a meter but do I actually need one for digital ? no - I don’t think so.

I have tried a few apps on various phones: iphone and android and it may be just me but I have found them out - often by a stop or more and I just don’t use or trust them now.

Camera spot metering for reflected light seems pretty accurate and consistent over various Nikon and Olympus bodies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top