dshfoto
Well-known
As I return to the basics, I have started using my M3 on a daily basis.
I am using a Vogitlander VC Meter II, as my light meter.
I was wondering which light meters are preferred by Forum members when using a rangefinder w/o a built in meter.
I would prefer not to have to buy an MP, just to take light readings.
Any suggestions?
I am using a Vogitlander VC Meter II, as my light meter.
I was wondering which light meters are preferred by Forum members when using a rangefinder w/o a built in meter.
I would prefer not to have to buy an MP, just to take light readings.
Any suggestions?
ernstk
Retro Renaissance
I have an M2 that I use with a Leicameter MR. Although it doesn't seem to get much approval , I like it.
It couples to the shutter speed dial and it's angle of view is the same as the 90mm frameline in your M3, so you can employ a degree of selectivity in your metering.
You need to be slightly careful when mounting and removing it as there is the possibility of scratching the top plate.
Regards
Ernst
It couples to the shutter speed dial and it's angle of view is the same as the 90mm frameline in your M3, so you can employ a degree of selectivity in your metering.
You need to be slightly careful when mounting and removing it as there is the possibility of scratching the top plate.
Regards
Ernst
richard_l
Well-known
I just use a Sekonic L-308 with all my unmetered rangefinders. It does incident as well as reflected readings. Any accurate meter should work fine, but the ones which mount on the accessory shoe look sort of cumbersome (to me) and usually don't have the convenient option of incident metering.
As far as I'm concerned, the main advantage of a built-in TTL meter is the ability to meter through filters. This is a real convenience if you change filters a lot, because it automatically compensates for different filter factors.
Regards,
Richard
As far as I'm concerned, the main advantage of a built-in TTL meter is the ability to meter through filters. This is a real convenience if you change filters a lot, because it automatically compensates for different filter factors.
Regards,
Richard
alexz
Well-known
I prefer my Polaris Digital, just becuase this is one I have at hand...
.
Pretty cheap (under 100$), gives both incident and reflected, also flash sync, simple and straight forward in use.
However, even though I usually have one with me at my outings, often I just do by my own intuition (based on Sunny 16 rule). Being able to compare my assessments with the meter at a times helps to develop my sense to exposure...
.Pretty cheap (under 100$), gives both incident and reflected, also flash sync, simple and straight forward in use.
However, even though I usually have one with me at my outings, often I just do by my own intuition (based on Sunny 16 rule). Being able to compare my assessments with the meter at a times helps to develop my sense to exposure...
Silva Lining
CanoHasseLeica
I use a Leica Meter MC with my M3 - I've heard a lot of people complain about the accuracy of this meter, but I guess I just have a good one, as I have used it to get accurate exposures on b&W and even Velvia.
Fo other cameras I have a 1960's shoe mounted meter, which I think was made by Sekonic - its pretty accurate too, although not as good as my Leicameter.
Fo other cameras I have a 1960's shoe mounted meter, which I think was made by Sekonic - its pretty accurate too, although not as good as my Leicameter.
markinlondon
Elmar user
Sunny 16 with a Sekonic L308 in my pocket for when it gets tricky. I had a VCII which I found fiddly but couldn't fault its performance. I also have a Leicameter MR somewhere but I don't like the bulk it adds to the camera.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I'll turn the question around: what do you want from a light meter that the VC II doesn't do for you? Answer that, mix with budget and you might be heading towards an answer...dshfoto said:
...Mike
richard_l
Well-known
I really think that incident metering can speed things up. If everything is mostly in sunlight, then take a reading, set the exposure, start taking pictures, and forget about exposure. Do the same if everything is mostly in shadow. There can always be exceptions, but this is the basic idea. With reflected metering (without a gray card), there is a tendency to use the meter for every shot, which leaves less time for composition and focussing, besides being a PITA and not particularly accurate.mfunnell said:
Regards,
Richard
palec
Well-known
I use VC meter II on M3 when Sunny 16 rule is tricky to use and I like it.
raid
Dad Photographer
I guess the exposure first, and if I have the time, I use my Pentax digital spotmeter for a few readings from areas in the targeted areas.
dshfoto
Well-known
Since I started this, I need to clarify a couple of things.
It has been number of years since I used a camera & light meter combo. I used to shoot with a Koni-Omega Range Finder and a analog meter.
But, after trying a number of other film and digital cameras, I switched to all Leica (and Hasselblad film for studio).
I shoot both Leica R (R digital and film) and Leica M.
What I was looking for was some advice on the type of light meters that 35mm Rangefinder Shooters are using with good results -- I was not sure how mauch the technology had avanced.
At the same time, I wanted to be able to do the metering before pulling out the camera, and pointing it. Many times I want to shoot quick, before there is much of a reaction to the camera.
I do have a Polaris flash meter, and will try using that, along with the VC II.
I have spent some time with the getting aquainted with M3. From a personal standpoint, I was most satisified with photo in the last year was with the M3.
Since I almost always shoot manual, (not using an auto camera program) I thought that I should be able to regress -- perhaps advance, to using a light meter and all manual camera.
I would also be interested in knowing what ASA rating film and type the all manual, no bulit in light meter RangeFinder Shooters are using. When shooting film I mostly shoot Ilford Delta 100 or higher. I am not sold on the C41 Processed B&W films.
Thanks for the advice.
It has been number of years since I used a camera & light meter combo. I used to shoot with a Koni-Omega Range Finder and a analog meter.
But, after trying a number of other film and digital cameras, I switched to all Leica (and Hasselblad film for studio).
I shoot both Leica R (R digital and film) and Leica M.
What I was looking for was some advice on the type of light meters that 35mm Rangefinder Shooters are using with good results -- I was not sure how mauch the technology had avanced.
At the same time, I wanted to be able to do the metering before pulling out the camera, and pointing it. Many times I want to shoot quick, before there is much of a reaction to the camera.
I do have a Polaris flash meter, and will try using that, along with the VC II.
I have spent some time with the getting aquainted with M3. From a personal standpoint, I was most satisified with photo in the last year was with the M3.
Since I almost always shoot manual, (not using an auto camera program) I thought that I should be able to regress -- perhaps advance, to using a light meter and all manual camera.
I would also be interested in knowing what ASA rating film and type the all manual, no bulit in light meter RangeFinder Shooters are using. When shooting film I mostly shoot Ilford Delta 100 or higher. I am not sold on the C41 Processed B&W films.
Thanks for the advice.
bobkonos
Well-known
I use the VC Meter II on my M3 with great results. Why pick a different meter? It is excellent for the RF cameras we love to use that have no meter. Keep it , use it. Simple.
colyn
ישו משיח
bobkonos said:
As do I..it's small and easy to mount on the cameras shoe or carry in a pocket..
A larger handheld meter may tip off a would be subject..
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Richard, I agree with almost everything you say - except I work that way with the VC II meter and without a gray card (but a fair facility for recognising nearby approximations). I've cured myself of attempting to meter every scene (harder than I thought). You're probably right that an incident meter would be more accurate for this kind of approach - but I like the size and convenience of the VC II meter (small, but right there on the hot shoe, readily available for occasional sanity checks) and it seems to do a good enough job for me, at least while shooting negative film. Slide film I suspect would be a whole other thing.richard_l said:
...Mike
richard_l
Well-known
You're right, Mike. Reflected can be used just like incident. However, most people probably adjust exposure a lot more than they need to. Built-in meters are the most worrisome. Those lights in the M6 viewfinder make you feel like you are morally obligated to fiddle with exposure for almost every shot.
Richard
Richard
pvdhaar
Peter
wilt
Well-known
Prefer incident measurement. Use a Calcu-light XP; don't think they are sold anymore.
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
I have no problems guestimating and in fact use Peter's meter above most However, I just bought another classic MR meter matching my M4s. It looked to be in very nice condition and for the price I couldn't resist. I like its looks on a classic M, and love the fact that it's coupled to the shutter speed knob. I also have a Weston Master V and bring that when I take out the other RFs.
However, I just bought another classic MR meter matching my M4s. It looked to be in very nice condition and for the price I couldn't resist. I like its looks on a classic M, and love the fact that it's coupled to the shutter speed knob. I also have a Weston Master V and bring that when I take out the other RFs.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Third vote for Sekonic L-308, simple, accurate, don't need batteries.
Of course, as far as going back to basics, nothing beats a healthy brain exercise using the sunny-16 rule.
works wonderfully for me...
Of course, as far as going back to basics, nothing beats a healthy brain exercise using the sunny-16 rule.
works wonderfully for me...