Light meter - yes or no?

Light meter - yes or no?

  • Always use light meter

    Votes: 284 32.1%

  • Never use light meter

    Votes: 43 4.9%

  • Generally don't bother

    Votes: 118 13.3%

  • Generally use one if I can

    Votes: 439 49.7%
  • Total voters
    884
This is a pretty personal choice. I cut my teeth on cameras with built-in averaging meters and then met a photographer whose work I really liked. He used a Gossen Luna-Pro, mostly in incident mode, so I tried that and found that I had more control over my images. Having the light meter made it possible for me to branch out confidently into formats other than 35mm, where it was not usual to have a meter in the camera (6x6 (Hassie 500C), 6x7 (Pentax 67), 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 and then back into classic rangefinders and TLRs from the 1950s and 60s). I always viewed the lightmeter as a problem solving tool. Don't really understand fervor of any flavor on the subject. Why worry? Go shoot film however you get good results.

Ben
 
just IMHO, but with a standard DSLR set to A or S or whatever, the camera (in pattern mode anyway) tries to pick the "perfect" exposure. this is usually rubbish. it is often times too bright and blown out. I prefer to set to A, then set the exposure compensation down a full stop or sometimes two when I do nature photography. this will generally capture the lighting as *I* see it perfectly.

trying to learn to do everything totally manually soon, though...
 
I find a light meter's failings harder to live with than my own. Human error I can understand. Machines that don't work ... Of course both systems require human interpretation / judgment. Meter or sunny 16 - it's a jumping off point for me to make my up mind up about the exposure that I want.
 
Last edited:
I tend to use a light meter - accurate crap looking Jessop or Leningrad 4 having given up on a heavy meter [ Weston V ] .LOL

However , a using my M8 manually and guessing / checking results instantly has expanded my awareness considerably . I am fine if a stay with one film speed , but thrown trying to compensate .

I am generally content with the selenium meter of my late Kiev 4 - accurate enough with a little thought / experience .

Sp much so that I have invested in a Contax III/IV from cheap scrap cameras . Should be seriously cool !
 
For street shooting, I generally don't bother unless the light conditions are really odd.

For landscapes, etc. I usually use one because there is plenty of time to set up the shot (assuming I have one with me). I almost always take an incident meter reading. If I shot slide film (which I almost never do) I would probably go with a reflected reading.
 
I recently picked up an old Sekonic Leader Deluxe 2 which I found in a bin at a used camera shop. It cost me about $8. I took it outside and checked it against the meter in my Olympus OM4Ti, and found that it was still accurate.

Having a meter is pretty convenient in those situations where you aren't sure of the light. I had been getting pretty good results by more or less guessing my exposure settings (mostly by luck), but I now use the meter to verify my settings, rather than to decide them.
 
Tom Rymour said:
My newsreel cameraman brother Alex introduced me to his Norwood incident meter with a dome in 1957. Ever since, I've been faithful to Sekonic. I may take a chance with b/w if I'm in a hurry, but never with trannies. My venerable Studio Auto II lives close to hand in my left pocket; right hand is reserved for the M2 on a wrist strap. When I walk into a particular place, I take a quick check from various angles -- and I'm ready.

Tom
Click to expand...

Some 30 plus years ago I bought a Sekonic L28c2. I find it more trustworthy than my two Gossens (Luna Pro and Luna Pro SBC), as much as I like them. Once after I dropped it I could only get it to work by putting it on its side. Now that has stopped and it works quite correctly again. They really are nice, which is why I presume they still command such high prices on ebay.
 
From experience I've learned to distrust meters, especially in strong light or low light. The only meter I can recommend is the VCII (I'm using it with an FP-1 right now.)

For B&W I never use a meter (even at night) unless it's built into the camera.
 
VinceC said:
I had no idea that RF photography was all about total technical control. I thought it had more to do with catching the moment.
Click to expand...

IMHO, an RF is just a tool for achieving any given result you want. Some folks like to go for precise metering and such, some others would rather rely on experience/sunny 16. To each his own i guess.
 
Almost any photoelectric or comparison meter works better than guesswork if you learn how to use it. 'How to use it' includes first, suiting your metering technique to the medium (neg or tranny/digi); second, judging whether a subject is 'average' and giving more or less exposure to non-average subjects; third, knowing where to point the meter; and fourth, adjusting ISO to suit your own preferences. It sounds forbidding but it's certainly not as difficult to get reliable exposures this way as it is by guesswork alone.

This is not to decry guesswork -- if it makes you happy, use it -- but I genuinely do not think than anyone who actually knows what he or she is doing would pretend that guesswork will invariably give you better exposures than (skilled) metering. It's nothing to do with RFs or 'catching the moment'. Sure, it's often better to shoot first and meter afterwards, if there's no time to meter, and plenty of times, there's no need to meter because experience will give you the same answer, faster; but a wilfull rejection of metering on the basis of some sort of absolutist fantasy is just plain silly. As silly, in fact, as believing that you must ALWAYS meter.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
I have a Weston Universal meter and a Minolta Auto IVf. The Minolta is a incident and flash meter the Weston is reflective
both very nice.

My built in meter is sunny sixteen and gets better all the time.
 
I agree with Roger 100% on the point that he makes. With b/w, you might be able to get away with guessing, but good, accurate light meters that don't cost an arms and a leg are plentiful and easy to use.

Find the one that you like the best and learn its quirks.

And shoot well-exposed photos.
 
I always have used a meter of one kind or another. I have always gotten very nice exposures in B&W, color prints and even slides. Recently I had a run of poor exposures abut once I changed batteries everything since has been outstanding.
 
wolves3012 said:
I often try and guess at exposure before taking a meter reading. That always reinforces the knowledge that I'm hopeless at guessing it!
Click to expand...

When I was a teenager, I used to continually guess the exposure wherever I would go, that way I could adjust the aperture as I lifted the camera, and then confirm with the meter.

I was using an OM-1 that puts both the aperture and the speed on the lens.
 
I really dunno which method is better.

On the one hand, i use machine c-41 print most of the time, this means my options are largely confined to the ISO 400 film, which narrows the range of possible Aperture/Shutterspeed combination. So for example, I take lots of indoor lighting environment, it is usually f2.8 or f2 with a speed of either 1/30 or 1/15s.

But just when I am comfortable compensating around this range, I get a set of horribly underexposed prints which I usually will pause and think about using a light meter.

Funny thing, Light meters, spot meters, incident and reflectives. They are either very cheap, like my $5 Zeiss Ikon light meter with selenium cells or incredibly expensive ones like the Sekonic, which retails for $1400 USD here in Singapore for the top of the line professional model. I don't want to pay more than $100 for a spot meter especially when I would rather buy a Jupiter-9 lens. My last attempt was a Soligor Spot meter which unfortunately did not work at all. I currently have a Minolta Autometer III, which is so precious to me that I hardly ever bring it out at all.

So, I hope someone comes out with an iPhone Light Meter so that we can use it cheaply and produce better pictures.

raytoei
 
Just a data point - went out shooting yesterday with my Canonet. Discovered the battery was dead. No biggie, just figured Sunny 16 with Pan F, cloudy, looks like 2.8 @ 250 for the shot I wanted. Took the shot. Went home, put a new battery in it, went back, meter said 2.8 @ 250. One *can* learn this stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom