Seems I may be in agreement with Maddoc... I find manual exposure awkward with built-in or clip-on meters. I figure the main justification for a built-in meter is for AE, which does contribute to speed and convenience. Otherwise I prefer incident reading with a hand-held meter, and my favorite is the compact Gossen Super Pilot SBC.
ully
ully
One good reason to use an external meter is to get incidence readings if you have a contrasty difficult situation.
Luddite Frank
Well-known
I believe Contax III was the first 35mm camera to offer a built-in meter, which puts us in the mid to late 1930's.
It does add considerable bulk to the camera body.
My first "real" 35mm camera was my Retina IIIc, with built-in meter... it worked/works well.
A bit "fiddly", but not an extra gadget bouncing around on a lanyard.
That said, my prime shooter nowadays is a Leica III (1934). I have a hand-held meter in my kit, a Toshiba CdS from the late 1960's, which looks like a copy of the Gossen Luna-Pilot. It is a good, compact meter.
Prior to getting the Toshiba (box-lot of meters from eBay), I was using my Gossen Luna-Six, a fine meter, but twice the size of the Toshiba.
Generally, when I'm out shooting, I get a general reading, then estimate from there, untl there's a significant change in the light. I do not meter every shot.
This has worked well for me, but then I'm not out for money-shots or "art"... and I generally shoot the same film (Kodacolor 200).
I am a little reluctant to leave the meter at home and go "Sunny - f/16", but that's due to lack of confidence. I keep a Kodak Signet 35 RF in my '61 Rambler, and I do not have a meter when shooting that - so far the results have been acceptable.
I've seen the clip-on Leicameter M and CV clip-on meters, and they don't appeal to me right now, being an LTM shooter. I usually shoot with an accessory finder (Nikon Vari-focal), so my camera shoe is ocuppied by that device. Given the cost of the CV double-accy shoe plus the CV meter, I could buy a new CV 21mm LTM lens...
I've acquired a couple of small selenium clip-on meters ( Leicameter 2 and a Koden clone), but both have dead cells, and I don't think they are worth the investment to repair.
I seem to be doing just fine with my hand-helds.
You can probably find a used CdS meter in good order fairly inexpensively; try to get one with an incident light diffuser built-in (Gossen)...
Good luck !
LF
It does add considerable bulk to the camera body.
My first "real" 35mm camera was my Retina IIIc, with built-in meter... it worked/works well.
A bit "fiddly", but not an extra gadget bouncing around on a lanyard.
That said, my prime shooter nowadays is a Leica III (1934). I have a hand-held meter in my kit, a Toshiba CdS from the late 1960's, which looks like a copy of the Gossen Luna-Pilot. It is a good, compact meter.
Prior to getting the Toshiba (box-lot of meters from eBay), I was using my Gossen Luna-Six, a fine meter, but twice the size of the Toshiba.
Generally, when I'm out shooting, I get a general reading, then estimate from there, untl there's a significant change in the light. I do not meter every shot.
This has worked well for me, but then I'm not out for money-shots or "art"... and I generally shoot the same film (Kodacolor 200).
I am a little reluctant to leave the meter at home and go "Sunny - f/16", but that's due to lack of confidence. I keep a Kodak Signet 35 RF in my '61 Rambler, and I do not have a meter when shooting that - so far the results have been acceptable.
I've seen the clip-on Leicameter M and CV clip-on meters, and they don't appeal to me right now, being an LTM shooter. I usually shoot with an accessory finder (Nikon Vari-focal), so my camera shoe is ocuppied by that device. Given the cost of the CV double-accy shoe plus the CV meter, I could buy a new CV 21mm LTM lens...
I've acquired a couple of small selenium clip-on meters ( Leicameter 2 and a Koden clone), but both have dead cells, and I don't think they are worth the investment to repair.
I seem to be doing just fine with my hand-helds.
You can probably find a used CdS meter in good order fairly inexpensively; try to get one with an incident light diffuser built-in (Gossen)...
Good luck !
LF
uhligfd
Well-known
For ease of operation the best is TTL on/in camera and automatic exposure. Just dial in some compensation as you see fit with all your experience.
If that is not available, a hand held one is the next best option: you can aim it at the sky without danger of burning holes in your RF shutter for incidence readings, you can point underhand, etc without twisting that camera into the dirt etc etc and the ease of reading a hand-held over one fiddled onto the camera is enormous.
If you are masochistic, have lose cash and want that 1950s look go for an on-the-accessory-shoe light meter by all means. AND also get a hand-held one to actually use.
And finally, there is nothing wrong with the Digisix, just read the manual about the range of light values in a scene and you will know the whole range of contrast in your pics ..
If that is not available, a hand held one is the next best option: you can aim it at the sky without danger of burning holes in your RF shutter for incidence readings, you can point underhand, etc without twisting that camera into the dirt etc etc and the ease of reading a hand-held over one fiddled onto the camera is enormous.
If you are masochistic, have lose cash and want that 1950s look go for an on-the-accessory-shoe light meter by all means. AND also get a hand-held one to actually use.
And finally, there is nothing wrong with the Digisix, just read the manual about the range of light values in a scene and you will know the whole range of contrast in your pics ..
Last edited: