canonet17
Newbie
I recived my canonet ql 17 yesterday. After some fiddling got it fully operational. Some of the fiddling was about the lightmeter. Put a SR44 battery with some silver foil and it works a threat now, just a 1/3 stop subexposition so ASA 400 is 350 now, the meter being completely linear. BUT I've realized that readings are different with a standard UV canon filter on place (x1). 1/3 of a stop less with filter on place. My question is if someone had seen this before and what would happen with a sunshade on place? Methinks for your enlightment and what a wonderful forum BTW. Sorry about my english but i'm spanish.
fishtek
Don
First, your English is fine. You are communicating your questions much better than I could do if I tried it in Spanish.
Because the meter portal is in the front of the lens carrying barrel, it sees what the lens sees, and interpolates the light directly. If adding the filter adds 1/3 stop, you won't have to do any more compensation. Read the meter directly. Put a lens hood on, and see what happens. Unless it's long enough to cause vignetting, it shouldn't make any difference. If it causes any less light to enter the meter sensor, the meter reading will still be a direct reading, and should be reliable.
Others here may have a different view on the matter...
Regards!
Don
Because the meter portal is in the front of the lens carrying barrel, it sees what the lens sees, and interpolates the light directly. If adding the filter adds 1/3 stop, you won't have to do any more compensation. Read the meter directly. Put a lens hood on, and see what happens. Unless it's long enough to cause vignetting, it shouldn't make any difference. If it causes any less light to enter the meter sensor, the meter reading will still be a direct reading, and should be reliable.
Others here may have a different view on the matter...
Regards!
Don
ghostganz
Member
With TTL-measuring cameras I will just move a bright object just outside of the frame if I want the metering to ignore it. But I've experienced that the Canonet's meter isn't that exact. Even light from far out on the sides will affect it, e.g. direct sunlight from the side. (I guess this would be called flare, if it was affecting the lens and not the meter). So I have to shade it from the sun with my hand to get the right reading in some circumstances.
Maybe this is what's causing the difference?
Maybe this is what's causing the difference?
Kim Coxon
Moderator
I would agree with ghost ganz on this. It is also worth noting that the Canonet meter is not linear and the exposure differnece when using a 1.5v battery will be greater in brighter light. Indoors, the difference is 1/2 stop at most. However, in bright sun, it can be as much as 2 stops. It would be better if you either adjusted the meter for silver cells or use a battery adapter.
Kim
Kim
canonet17
Newbie
With hood on is about a full stop less! Just thinking how canon engineers made calculations. If you buy a new camera, especially a mass marketed one most people use the camera as is, without filters nor shades, so probably meter is not undernstood to subexpose. The reading without filters nor shades must be the right one? I'll see, pics in a couple of days. Today brought everything to the hospital to develope the roll while on duty....everything except the roll, damm
tonal1
Established
I have noticed the 1/3 stop difference. One additional thing to be aware of though id that the added filter not only changes the overall reading, it also distinctly changes the meters field of view. The QL meters have a vary wide field of view that gets averaged together. With average scenes, or if you point the camera at a gray wall, than you will see about 1/3 stop difference. But if you are photographing a landscape, and hold the camera level, than the filter may be blocking the brightest part of the frame, the sky, and effecting the overall exposure more than 1/3 stop. In this scenario, the meter "sees" more of the ground and less of the sky. Just my 2 cents.