is canonet ql17 "center weighted" ?

[ampguy]

I can't really do a completely accurate comparison with my other 2 cameras, because the ql17 giii has 40mm lens, and my digital has zoom, which covers 40mm, but I've just aligned by objects at l/r, top/bottom, and that's how in my previous thread sort of calibrated or decided my canonet matched my digital, whose exposures I was happy with.

Now I tested the digital and canonet, (again, approximating same focal length with objects and light position/amount) which match, with my SLR.

My SLR's meter is about 1 f stop smaller at dead center, but slightest off center it quickly moves to 2 stops smaller, indicating a small spot area is used for metering, while the canonet, and digital (digital has 3 modes, full frame, center weighted, and spot, I think I used spot to compare with canonet and get same metering). The SLR meter moves in an out of "green" by 1-2 stops as I move up/down/l/r, while the Canonet meter fstop only moves around by 1/2 to 1 step as I move about the same direction when metering on an indoor light w/ white wall behind.

I corrected for same ASA's, and checked battery voltages, and I'm fine with these differences, I know they all take good pictures, but I'm thinking that I might want to overexpose on the canonet 1 EV if my current roll of new ASA print film comes out grainy with new 200 print film at "normal" center weighted or whatever weighted metering the canonet does, per suggestions from others here.

Anyways, is it better to learn using a spot meter, or center weighted, to ultimately get to the point of not needing a meter. I mean I don't need a meter now, I can just do sunny 16 and bracket, but to get really good. How do other cameras meter, by spot or center weighted?

 

[sbug]

Someone will have the real answer soon but from my experience, the Canonet meters center-ish. 😉 Unless you are using slide film, the latitude of the film will give enough for a slightly imperfect exposure anyhow. Since the meter stopped working on mine, I take a quick handheld reading and then shoot at will, making minor adjustments if the shadows or light call for it, but often not adjusting at all. If you are worried about a bit more grain than you'd like, I would second your thought to overexpose a bit. Color neg is much bettter slightly overexposed than under.

 

[ampguy]

thanks sbug

thanks sbug

I think that after the current roll to check grain with new film, I will start shooting 1 stop over exposed by setting the ASA to half of what it really is.

The weird thing is that it will now be like 3 stops more overexposed than my SLR in certain off centered indoor lit situations, but still matching the digital cam, and only 1 or 2 stops more than the SLR when centered exactly on a light source.

I wonder if the processing machines make up for this difference. My SLR pics are never underexposed, unless I took a bad pic.

Someone will have the real answer soon but from my experience, the Canonet meters center-ish. 😉 Unless you are using slide film, the latitude of the film will give enough for a slightly imperfect exposure anyhow. Since the meter stopped working on mine, I take a quick handheld reading and then shoot at will, making minor adjustments if the shadows or light call for it, but often not adjusting at all. If you are worried about a bit more grain than you'd like, I would second your thought to overexpose a bit. Color neg is much bettter slightly overexposed than under.

 

[Mark W]

What battery are you using with the Canonet?

The Canonet is a Cds cell meter with the sensor being the little lens at the top of the lens just uder the filter threads. There is no center weighting to it that is a TTL metering thing. The cell actually covers and area larger then the 40mm lens does.

When it does not jive with your other cameras it it due their having a MUCH narrower field of acceptance then the cell in the Canonets.

Hope this helps

 

[dmr]

My guess (and that's what it is, a guess) is that the lens in front of the photo sensor is such that it will cover the entire field of the normal lens and more, thus leading me to believe that it's more in the averaging category than the spot or center-weighted.

It may be somewhat weighted to the center, but if it is, I'm sure that is by slop factor more than design.

It definitely is not TTL.

My other RF, Mamiya SD, has a larger lens for the photodetector to the side of the main lens and I've always considered this as averaging.

Also (one thing my dad (MHRIP) taught me about photography that I did listen to) was to always think of a meter reading as just a suggestion on how to shoot, and not the gospel truth.

 

[ampguy]

Hi Mark

Hi Mark

I'm using a 1.4V adapted battery, but my camera has had it's meter adjusted for 625 alkaline, so the .1V could be something as well, and I have wein 1.35V's as well, but I'm going to go with 625 alkalines long term as that's what it was calibrated to, and then ASA and/or just manual use if I need to.

First roll was pretty good exposure overall, but the metering "reaction" or lack of center spot focus is very evident, see my other reply, but when static, and comparing to 2 other cameras it is right on when light is in center, but it veers off from my SLR which apparntly has a non adjustable spot meter.

My digital camera has 3 modes, spot, center weighted, and average, and whatever I last set it in matches the canonet.

I think I just need to put a whole lot of rolls through it with constant film and battery and then I'll know what's going on.

What battery are you using with the Canonet?

The Canonet is a Cds cell meter with the sensor being the little lens at the top of the lens just uder the filter threads. There is no center weighting to it that is a TTL metering thing. The cell actually covers and area larger then the 40mm lens does.

When it does not jive with your other cameras it it due their having a MUCH narrower field of acceptance then the cell in the Canonets.

Hope this helps

 

[ampguy]

i think you're right

i think you're right

I think it is an "averaging" meter too, with any center weighting just being a fluke. However it is fine, just different from spot metering. I'll adjust to it.

My guess (and that's what it is, a guess) is that the lens in front of the photo sensor is such that it will cover the entire field of the normal lens and more, thus leading me to believe that it's more in the averaging category than the spot or center-weighted.

It may be somewhat weighted to the center, but if it is, I'm sure that is by slop factor more than design.

It definitely is not TTL.

My other RF, Mamiya SD, has a larger lens for the photodetector to the side of the main lens and I've always considered this as averaging.

Also (one thing my dad (MHRIP) taught me about photography that I did listen to) was to always think of a meter reading as just a suggestion on how to shoot, and not the gospel truth.

 

[Mark W]

If you put a nice hood on the lens it will help limit sky effecting your metering I use a nice Hoya 48mm metal hood on my Black G-III QL-17 and a 49mm ZHoya with my chrome one using a step up ring. in both cases the hoods are just outside the point where they would effet the corners. I have found that out door shots turned out slightly better metered with the hood. I shot mostly 100 ASA slide film or XP-2 at 250-320 ASA in mine.

 

[ampguy]

Thanks Mark

Thanks Mark

I'll check out hoods for the Canonet. One thing is I'll probably have to try before I buy, as I can't imagine losing any more view, as the lens already gets into a little of the corner when focusing, but I can certainly see how it would help in many conditions.

If you put a nice hood on the lens it will help limit sky effecting your metering I use a nice Hoya 48mm metal hood on my Black G-III QL-17 and a 49mm ZHoya with my chrome one using a step up ring. in both cases the hoods are just outside the point where they would effet the corners. I have found that out door shots turned out slightly better metered with the hood. I shot mostly 100 ASA slide film or XP-2 at 250-320 ASA in mine.

 

[Mark W]

Don't worry about the corner blockage all you do is turn the camera a couple degrees check whats there and focus and shoot. I kno wthis bugs a lot of SLR owners when the try RF's. But it's really a non problem. What do you do with your SLR only showing you like 90% or some even less of the frame in the viewfinder? then the lab crops a little as well.

Yes a hood will block a little of the view but not effect the artist abilities of the photographer it's just one tiny thing to deal with.

Imagine what a PIA it was when no photo could be taken without a tripod a Mule and a wagon with a darkroom mounted on the back!

Get a nice 48 or 49mm screw in stright side hood about 1" deep mount her up and go shoot some photo's stop worring about the little stuff. Pretty soon it will be second nature to tip the camera a little if you need to see that corner you won't even notice your doing it.

enjoy I love both my Canonets Though I must admit to being partical to the Black one!

 

[Spyderman]

I am quite satisfied with the metering of my Canonet. I always have an UV filter on, which helps block some light from sky from falling on the sensor (the filter ring works as a slight hood).

If you want to use a hood, then I would recommend a round type, not a rectangular. I put a rectangular one on, and it blocked the sensor quite a bit. The readings were about 2 stops overexposure (compared to the reading without hood).

 

[40oz]

the meter on my QL17 G3 seems to have a fresnel-type lens, which kind of implies to me averaging with more weight to the center.

One issue I find with my digital is when using the "multi" metering (a form of averaging) vs. the spot is that a bright sky in a shot of a crowd in the shadow (for ex.) is it underexposes the shot. In that case a spot meter would be best, but I just use program mode to increase exposure to compensate. In a similar situation with my Canonet, I tend to see what it says, then set the aperture or speed to increase exposure in manual mode. I guess I could move the film speed ring instead of the aperture ring, ehh I'm slow sometimes 🙂 Either way, I use the camera metering as a guide, and adjust accordingly.

Keep in ind that if you point a meter at a white wall and follow the meter, you get a gray wall. If you point it at a black, dark blue/green/brown wall, you get a grayish wall. You need to adjust the exposure for the kind of light the meter is seeing, keeping in mind the image you want to get. One could never vary from the Canonet's meter and get a roll of well-exposed pics, or consciously adjust the camera to get each shot to look like what you want, regardless of whether it was "well-exposed" from a purely technical stand. I takes a bit of experience to know when to compensate by one, two, or more stops, but print film is forgiving, making experimentation easy.

FWIW, I use a Wein cell for a battery, and it seems to be reliable, and so far, has lasted over a year. Take that as you will.

 

[Pherdinand]

"is canonet ql17 "center weighted" ? "

Yup.

 

[maxim]

average metering

average metering

back in those days there are no centre weighted meter,
its average metering

the entire scene is metered as 18% gray

if you look carefully the meter is on the rim of the lens

 

[BrianShaw]

The manual isn't specific on this issue, but I concur wit those who believe it is an averaging meter.

http://primco.org/photo/galleries/canonet_ql17_manual/index-013.htm