Happy O-Boy Find: Weston Master

[dreilly]

Just picked up a Weston IV on ebay for 12 dollars--and the bloody thing works and seems accurate. The IV is an interesting model, a little departure from everything before and after. I like the design of it, especially the side slider instead of that finickly little button (finicky if you actually want to lock/unlock it.

I have two questions for the Master Gurus out there:

1) There are quite a few of the holes in the cell cover that are filled in. At first I thought it was accumulated dust, but no, it's tiny plastic plugs. Does anyone know if this is how they adjusted the meter for variances in the selenium cells?

2) With the IV, the film speeds are written between the traditional "rectangle with a line through it" blocks to align the outer ring's pointer with. I'm assuming that the pointer should go to the block "after" the number. Is that right? (Anyone who uses a IV should know what I'm talking about.)

The lower-light scale is a little sticky and doesn't come up quite fully, but I think that should be easy to fix. I'm at peace with the ebay gods for the moment.

 

[MCTuomey]

Excellent find! I have a couple and like 'em a lot. They have ... funk.

I have two questions for the Master Gurus out there:

1) There are quite a few of the holes in the cell cover that are filled in. At first I thought it was accumulated dust, but no, it's tiny plastic plugs. Does anyone know if this is how they adjusted the meter for variances in the selenium cells?

Not a guru, but I have one with add'l holes drilled into the the cover plate. George Milton told me that this was the usual way owners "adjusted" for declining sensitivity of the cell over time, instead of having it repaired or calibrated. Could yours just be the reverse case? Logically, sure.

2) With the IV, the film speeds are written between the traditional "rectangle with a line through it" blocks to align the outer ring's pointer with. I'm assuming that the pointer should go to the block "after" the number. Is that right? (Anyone who uses a IV should know what I'm talking about.).

I align the triangular pointer with the metered reading on the inner disc (hi-scale 25 to 1600, lo-scale 0 to 25). Then I can read off the various combos of aperture and shutter speed. on the two outer rings. Does that make sense? It's more complicated to say than do.

The lower-light scale is a little sticky and doesn't come up quite fully, but I think that should be easy to fix. I'm at peace with the ebay gods for the moment.

Mine loosened up with some use, too. But I splurged on a calibration visit to Quality Light Metric after awhile - I liked it so much I thought it'd be worth it.

 

[Andrew3511]

My Master V has the same little holes on the flap to adjust sensitivity. I have always assumed that it was adjusted when the meter was 1st set up, you drill just enough holes in the cover to give the intended drop in EV when it's in position, 7 stops from memory with the V. Nothing beats experience with the meter, I reckon mine is pretty accurate but tends towards underexposure at low light levels. Set what you think is the right film speed, see what you get and adjust accordingly?

 

[dreilly]

Thanks for the above imput. I did some side by side testing with a Master V that is quite accurate and linear even though it's old.

Results. The IV (even with the added holes) is oversenstive by at least one EV # on both scales, and sometimes (on the brightest end with the cover closed, more like 2EV.) None of which makes much sense.

I wonder if Selenium cells can become TOO sensitive over time? It appears this one was always a little too sensitive--and it has very little signs of use (and came in it's original box with the lanyard not even attached) suggesting the holes were either filled in the factory or by the previous owner soon after purchase.

Bummer. I have working V that I'm not that crazy about--the scales are a little cluttered, and a non-linear IV that needs work but that I really like--the feel and layout are just great. I'll finally have to throw some change at George Milton I guess...

thanks everyone!
doug

 

[wolves3012]

Thanks for the above imput. I did some side by side testing with a Master V that is quite accurate and linear even though it's old.

Results. The IV (even with the added holes) is oversenstive by at least one EV # on both scales, and sometimes (on the brightest end with the cover closed, more like 2EV.) None of which makes much sense.

I wonder if Selenium cells can become TOO sensitive over time? It appears this one was always a little too sensitive--and it has very little signs of use (and came in it's original box with the lanyard not even attached) suggesting the holes were either filled in the factory or by the previous owner soon after purchase.

Bummer. I have working V that I'm not that crazy about--the scales are a little cluttered, and a non-linear IV that needs work but that I really like--the feel and layout are just great. I'll finally have to throw some change at George Milton I guess...

thanks everyone!
doug

Like most things, selenium cells deteriorate over time and so produce lower outputs not higher ones. Westons don't have any means to adjust them besides the crude methods (tape over part of the cell, for instance). If you plugged some holes in the baffle that would only be valid with the baffle closed so it'd still be wrong with it open. I don't actually know this as a fact, but I suspect that there was no attempt made to calibrate Westons at manufacture. I think they relied on good quality control over the cells. Remember that film latitude will take care of small inaccuracies anyway, in most circumstances.

I too like the IV over the other models, simply because the scales are bigger and I've reached the age where I struggle to read other models without lugging my reading glasses around! I can read the scales on the IV without them. Carrying reading glasses and having to put them on & take them off just to read a meter is annoying!

 

[Abbazz]

There are quite a few of the holes in the cell cover that are filled in. At first I thought it was accumulated dust, but no, it's tiny plastic plugs. Does anyone know if this is how they adjusted the meter for variances in the selenium cells?

I have a Weston Master V which exhibits the same filled-in holes. I guess it is some kind of factory calibration.

I bought this meter because I have heard so many good things about Weston meters. I have been very disappointed. Westons are nicely built collectibles but they are not very usable for real life photography: the readings are not accurate and get even worse in low light. The selenium cell deteriorates over exposure to light, leading to repetitive calibration and ultimately to a very expensive cell replacement.

When I don't want to bother with batteries, I use sunny 16. When I need a sensistive and accurate meter, I know I can trust my Luna pro F and its silicon cell.

Cheers,

Abbazz

 

[wolves3012]

I have a Weston Master V which exhibits the same filled-in holes. I guess it is some kind of factory calibration.

I bought this meter because I have heard so many good things about Weston meters. I have been very disappointed. Westons are nicely built collectibles but they are not very usable for real life photography: the readings are not accurate and get even worse in low light. The selenium cell deteriorates over exposure to light, leading to repetitive calibration and ultimately to a very expensive cell replacement.

When I don't want to bother with batteries, I use sunny 16. When I need a sensistive and accurate meter, I know I can trust my Luna pro F and its silicon cell.

Cheers,

Abbazz

Horses for courses. So far, the only shots that came out wrong for me, using a Weston Master III, were the ones where I accidentally set the camera wrongly or bracketed. Maybe I'm lucky, maybe I'm just good at knowing when to interpret the reading (unlikely!) or maybe you're just unlucky.

Remember that most Westons are a good few years old now and don't imagine that your Luna Pro is immune to ageing, silicon sensors age too. One of the main reasons for continuing to use selenium cells, by the way, is that their reponse is closely matched to that of film. That's not true for silicon sensors, although they can be made near enough by various fiddles (and hopefully are in a photographic meter). Westons, along with most selenium meters, are rugged and reliable in general. They have their limitations for sure.