In theory
.....it seems you'all watching tv instead of taking a shot of the moon
If this saga continues, I may well expose a LF frame purely on the moon just to prove to myself that my belief of the luminosity relating somewhere close to looney F/11 is somewhere close to correct exposure.
Let's think about this logically,
I now possess no kit with TTL metering not that I relied on it an awful lot anyway as I have been ucky to be able to judge fairly accuratly differing light levels without the need of a meter, TTL or otherwise.
Just by looking at a relatively bright scene, I would have thought that the average tog ( who shoots fairly regularly) would be able to give a reasonably accurate assesment of the aperture and shutter speed required to expose correctly for that luminosity at any given film speed without the aid of a meter.
I am seriously struggling to understand why this is causing such difficulty...Nailing exposure may take a few attempts but to get somewhere close isn't imo hard to do, in fact you've proved it with the shot you've taken this evening with the Nex albiet the camera did the calculation and not you!
If I had a really long lens and a LF kit to use it with, and the moon was visible, I would be outside now shooting it…..that was the idea I had earlier when I asked about what focal length you were using.
Even with my longest 300mm ( equivalent 100mm ) lens on LF, I may give it a go.
Ok so it'll be a pin prick of light on a 5s4 sheet of film but scanned at 9600 and cropped right down, even without IQ, it is possible that the exposure will show itself to be correct or incorrect, as the case may be.
Enough of my waffle......