Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
I obviously need help using my L-318.
OK, I've used an old Gossen Sixon previously, and I dare say I never got an exposure wrong, or wrong enough to wreck the negative completely. I used reflective metering for the most part and incident whenever I had the main subject up close and available. For reflected light measurements I pointed it at the main subject area, then the sky and then the ground and made up my mind as to what would influence the shot the most. And it worked. However it was a pig in low light, selenium meter and all, so I thought I needed something better.
A month or so back I got hold of a Sekonic L-318. And started using it the same way. In low light situations I had great success. However when the lighting is bright and overcast (flat), or lots of snow (as it is at the moment) I seem to get it all wrong. I'm overexposing by at least a stop and half, and more at times. Seldom do I get it right in these conditions. I dare say that most of the negatives can be wet printed, they look dense and contrasty, but still have lots of detail. But my scanner will have nothing of it. Some are however unsalvageable.
I'm using 120 TMAX100 and Acros100 in Caffenol. Both work well in this soup normally, it tends to compensate the highlights somewhat, but can evidently not perform miracles. Both films push better than the pull however, so one stop may be OK, but two or more probably not.
Should I be using the ambient metering attachment under flat and/or bright light conditions, rather than the reflected light metering attachment? What else can I be doing wrong? (I've taken the Sixon with me when shooting with an old Welta folder, in the same conditions, and I have more luck)
P.S. Yes, I am going to get a spot metering attachment. But until then....
P.P.S No, I'm not going to get a better scanner, its done me fine so far. I will however be building a darkroom at a later stage.
OK, I've used an old Gossen Sixon previously, and I dare say I never got an exposure wrong, or wrong enough to wreck the negative completely. I used reflective metering for the most part and incident whenever I had the main subject up close and available. For reflected light measurements I pointed it at the main subject area, then the sky and then the ground and made up my mind as to what would influence the shot the most. And it worked. However it was a pig in low light, selenium meter and all, so I thought I needed something better.
A month or so back I got hold of a Sekonic L-318. And started using it the same way. In low light situations I had great success. However when the lighting is bright and overcast (flat), or lots of snow (as it is at the moment) I seem to get it all wrong. I'm overexposing by at least a stop and half, and more at times. Seldom do I get it right in these conditions. I dare say that most of the negatives can be wet printed, they look dense and contrasty, but still have lots of detail. But my scanner will have nothing of it. Some are however unsalvageable.
I'm using 120 TMAX100 and Acros100 in Caffenol. Both work well in this soup normally, it tends to compensate the highlights somewhat, but can evidently not perform miracles. Both films push better than the pull however, so one stop may be OK, but two or more probably not.
Should I be using the ambient metering attachment under flat and/or bright light conditions, rather than the reflected light metering attachment? What else can I be doing wrong? (I've taken the Sixon with me when shooting with an old Welta folder, in the same conditions, and I have more luck)
P.S. Yes, I am going to get a spot metering attachment. But until then....
P.P.S No, I'm not going to get a better scanner, its done me fine so far. I will however be building a darkroom at a later stage.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Reflected light attachment should UNDERexpose a snowy landscape. If you get overexposure it is probably needing calibration.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Hi Chris. Yes, I thought so too. I usually add a stop or two for snow, but have had to dispense with that with this meter, and still I get overexposure. Much as I hate to, I'll have to bring out the DSLR next time and compare the two.
Richard G
Veteran
What about taking both the Sixon and the Sekonic and comparing them for the same shot, similar to what you are intending with the DSLR. Your subject, sky, ground method obviously served you well but might be unnecessarily complex. I have had a similar problem recently with taking up an M5 with a very different internal meter to my M6. It is often tempting me to overexpose in situations where this surprises me. I just ignore it and go with what i think the exposure should be. Because I am often using an M2 and hand held incident meter I have reasonably firm figures in my head for most light situations. The M6 meter, on the other hand, is a meter I almost could follow slavishly.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Yes, that is of course the most convenient approach. The conditions I'm having trouble with are well within the Sixon's capabilities. At least I now have a handful of films that I can save up for when I will be able to print them in my future darkroom 
Another possible culprit is of course the shutter on my main camera/lens combination (leaf shutter). It's just CLA'd and has worked well in the cold up until now, even at 20C below, but may of course be slow in the cold. I'll have to think of a way to have it tested under these conditions.
Another possible culprit is of course the shutter on my main camera/lens combination (leaf shutter). It's just CLA'd and has worked well in the cold up until now, even at 20C below, but may of course be slow in the cold. I'll have to think of a way to have it tested under these conditions.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
I went out with a different camera and the results were much closer to the mark. I've done some visual testing on my Kowa 85mm, just CLA'd I might add, and the leaf shutter is completely off on just about all speeds. The delay before it claps shut seems to be OK, but the shutting action is veeeeeery slow. That happened very suddenly, I've been using it solely since it came back from service in October, and put at least 15 rolls through it.
At least that explains why I've not risen an eyebrow at the meter readouts.
At least that explains why I've not risen an eyebrow at the meter readouts.
Steve M.
Veteran
Unfortunately, this is one of those weakest-link-in-the-chain deals. You need to know what speeds your shutter is working at, and you need to know if your meter is accurate. The meter part is easy, just test it against one you know is accurate. The shutter will require building or buying a shutter tester. I bought mine on fleabay many years ago when I was mostly shooting medium format cameras. Mine ran about $40 and has saved me much more than that over time. There's instructions on the web for building one for cheap, and it looks pretty easy to do.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
The shutter is off, no doubt about it. This leaf shutter has a quick closing shutter action, the difference in the speeds being the delay before it claps shut. The latter seems to work, the former does not. The blades do not have enough momentum to close properly, let alone fast enough.