Leica LTM do you use a light meter?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
I don't need a lightmeter

I don't need a lightmeter

My first camera was a nikkormat FT2, 2 months later its lightmeter stopped to work, so I bought a lightmeter (sekonic L188 if I remember correctly) and I started to use it. One year later I know my first rangefinder cameras (mokba-5, and later canon IV-Sb2, canon P...). Now I have a nikon F100, nikon F3, bessa R, and other cameras. Today I don't love to use the lightmeter of cameras, and in a large number of case I set my camera manually, the experience maturate using a lightmeters help me and generally the exposure is correct, also using slide.
 
I find it somewhat liberating to use a handheld meter. I find that if I have one with me and I am using it I will not rely on my camera's meter, and I also will not "meter" as often. I will set in my mind what exposures are needed that day and just adjust appropriately, checking with the meter every once in while to make sure I am still on target.
 
Rover said it...

Rover said it...

Hello:

I find that I use a handheld light meter* in preference to the ttl meter of a M6 to keep me honest as the general light level changes. Metering can get in the way of seeing.

yours
Frank

*DigiSix in incident mode
 
Last edited:
Fred Parkers ultimate exposure Computer is a great resource. I would recommend it to anyone. I still use a light meter. If I have the time and really want to get the exposure I want the meter allows me to measure several areas of the scene to get an idea not only about the general lighting conditions but total range of light in a scene.

So, the long and the short of it is: the more tools you know how to use the better off you are.
 
I prefer knowing i got the pic than some macho thing.

Learn to read light for sure for when ther is no time, but use the a meter for something other than full sun when there is time.
 
Ronald M said:
I prefer knowing i got the pic than some macho thing.

Learn to read light for sure for when ther is no time, but use the a meter for something other than full sun when there is time.
Click to expand...

Agree.

Question: is there a noticeable difference in the way pictures are exposed when using a handheld vs. the in-camera meter, or does it ammount to the same thing?
 
The caveat is that you ideally have a lightmeter available in order to learn how to live without one.. Either that, or you need to meticulously write down all exposure data and cross check them with the negs..

But it is doable, and in the end you'll find that light levels are pretty predictable throughout the day and given the weather. Do take the printed exposure guides with a grain of salt, they assume that you live at modest lattitudes. Too far north or south, and you'll have to open up 1 or 2 stops.

The great thing is that you'll be able to recognise when a built-in light meter does something odd. And, as Rover has already pointed out; you learn not to ride the exposure.. which means you'll get much more consistent results irrespective of subject reflectivity.
 
My post seems to have crossed this one..
boarini2003 said:
Agree.

Question: is there a noticeable difference in the way pictures are exposed when using a handheld vs. the in-camera meter, or does it ammount to the same thing?
Click to expand...
Depends on the kind of meter. If you use an incident meter, you measure the light. It's not dependent on the subject. The meter inside the camera tries to expose the scene for an average mid grey reflection, i.e. it is subject dependent.

Of course, with a grey card you can use the built in meter to establish the light level, but it's not really convenient.
 
I have several cameras without light meters. I have sometimes used one to confirm settings of in camera light meters. When I got my first light meter (Sekonic Micro Leader), I found it better in really low light than my in camera (Yashica TL Super) meter. With my Fujica ST 901, I don't think I ever used a separate light meter. When I got my Sekonic L28c2, I found I often preferred it to a reflected light meter. I like my Gossen Luna Pro best as a reflected light meter. Even the Luna Pro sbc seems to work best that way. Both are good as incident meters, but nothing beats the Sekonic L28c2 except below 4 lux, it gets a little harder then. At that point, the Gossens come out.

Answer to your question: I use a light meter when I need to. I can also still to some extent guestimate exposure without one. A trick I learned in Vietnam when I didn't have a light meter and had to use the data sheets provided with film. Got pretty good at it then. Not so good any more though. Getting lazy perhaps.
 
Last edited:
I bookmarked the paper for future reference. While I did not see a lot of new information in it, it is the most complete compilation on this subject that I have found. I try to use the "Sunny 16" rule as a starting point, and work from there, using a small pocket meter as a check for unusual situations. My SLR has built-in metering, which I find adequate.

Jim N.
 
I'm a "Sunny 11" afficionado myself, but I do use a light meter indoors, in deep shade and after dark.
 
I always carry a light meter when shooting w/meterless cameras, but only meter as the light changes.

EcoLeica said:
I came across this page during one of my daily deviations from my research. Im keen to learn how to read light without a lightmeter (would make street work easier). Just want to know if anybody has tried similar techniques and if they were successful?

http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm#Introduction

Cheers
Click to expand...
 
I use an incident meter with my meterless rangefinders. In my experience incident meters are far more reliable than meters that use reflected light. Highly recommended.
 
Though just a mere boy to this day, when I started messing with photography in the early 1960s, light meters -- built in or otherwise -- weren't nearly as common as they are today.
A lot of us learned to expose using the sheet of paper Kodak packed with the film, learning to read sun angle, intensity and shadows. It's not nearly as difficult as people make out but it can be a little slower. Indoor exposures took either flashbulbs or some experience with Tri-X.
I think I shot photos for six or seven years, mostly on Plus-X, before getting my hands on a meter. The negatives I still have print very easily. Kodachrome wasn't in a kid's budget.
 
I shot meterless for a while, and got pretty good at guessing exposure. I ended up purchasing a cheep selenium cell meter that is suprisingly very accurate. Now I kind of use it to make sure my "crazy eye" is working, and adjust exposure based on an ejumacated guess.
 
Oddly enough, I just finished a roll in conditions where I really value a built in meter. "Partly Cloudy". Sometimes bright sun, sometimes dull. With the bloody clouds scudding along and the light swinging two stops every two minutes that needle in the finder seems priceless. Especially when trying to track small children or a basket ball game.
When the pace is leisurely I can guestimate exposures (and bracket!) and be sure of my shot. When you're depending on intuition and dumb luck however I shamelessly take what help I can get (auto focus, like anti lock brakes, does not necessarily help! Sometimes you want to lock the brakes...)
Incident meters are wonderful. When you are photographing still life. Three year olds do not fall into that category. Use mine when ever I shoot a bowel of fruit though.
Fred Parkers ultimate exposure Computer is the best presentation of exposure I have ever seen. Save the web page. Print it. Nail it to the bathroom wall across from the camode. Laminate it and use it as a place mat at every meal. Tape it to the mirror on your bedroom ceiling. Whatever it takes study it. Then you'll know what the hell the meter is telling you.

The real reason to use a meter, actually, is so that you can justify Light Meter GAS.....
Man doth not live by bodies and lenses alone!
 
tkluck said:
...Incident meters are wonderful. When you are photographing still life. Three year olds do not fall into that category. Use mine when ever I shoot a bowel of fruit though ...
Click to expand...

I think incident meters have more flexibility than you suggest ... they aren't just for still subjects. You can take one reading of the light falling on a location and then shoot away. Only when the light changes do you need to take another reading. I have shot sports car races, soccer games, and other active subjects while using my incident meter. If you have kids who are running in and out of sunshine and shadowed areas you might need two readings for the differing lighting conditions. Very doable.
 
I don't own a light meter and I have a number of cameras that are meterless including the one I use most. For the last few years I've shot without one and really I don't even think about it much anymore. I shoot mostly black and white print film that isn't particularly sensitive to over exposusre so I try and err in that direction. Seems to work for me. I just shot some slide film that I had cross processed so all bets are off on that, but they all came about pretty well exposed.

Shooting with a Holga for a year or so which is basically f8 and 1/125 of a second depending on how old the spring shutter is, taught me a lot about light and film speed so now having a camera when I can adjust both the aperture and the film speed now seems like a luxury.

That said I'd like a meter for low light work where Sunny 16 is out the window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom