Light metering with Leica Ms with no meter

[srichmond]

Seems that the Leica M2, M3 and M4 are popular still. I'm curious to know how people work with light metering when there's no meter on your camera. Do you carry around a meter, and take regular readings, or do you "wing it" by using the Sunny 16 rule etc?

Personally, I don't have enough confidence not to use a meter, and the thought of having to use a hand held meter every time I take a photo seems a bit like too much work.

 

[sleepyhead]

Hello, I carry a thin meter in my pocket and take an INCIDENT reading once in a while, like if I walk into a new light condition. From that reading I wing it somewhat, such as if you walk from full sun to partial sun. You'd be surprised BOTH by how little the light changes in a given area, and also by how good you get at judging the light changes once you've got your reference reading. I also tend to use the same film at the same ASA so after a while you get more confident about just guessing. In my case it's Tri-X B&W film, so it has a bit of latitude for errors as well.

PLUS, remember, with B&W especially, IS THERE REALLY A CORRECT EXPOSURE? Perhaps an underexposed silloette will turn out more interesting than a "correctly" exposed shot? Shoot alot and let some chance have it's play - you may be surprised.

LASTLY, I actually find cameras with AE MORE WORK than all manual cameras because I'm constantly worried about how the meter is BEING FOOLED by the lightness or darkness of my particular subject. (Although AE is usually fine for the average subject).

If you want to use a camera with no built-in meter, my advice would be to start carrying a handheld meter ALL THE TIME, and play a game with your self called "GUess the Exposure" - guess and then take a reading. You'll notice improvement after some practice.

Good luck.

 

[FPjohn]

Sleepyhead is wide awake. Constant metering gets in the way of seeing. An occasional incident light reading keeps exposures in the ball park. The Gossen Digisix is a small and convenient solution to metering IMHO.

yours
FPJ

 

[funkaoshi]

I've been metering using Sunny-16. It's actually much easier than I thought -- at least when you're outdoors and dealing with mostly even lighting. Indoors it's trickier, and I'm probably guessing more than anything else. I haven't had too many way off shots, so I think it's worth a go.

 

[BillP]

Sunny-16 most of the time, incident reading every so often, adjust exposure as and when needed, judged by eye. It's very liberating.

Regards,

Bill

 

[myoptic3]

Yes, I agree. It is a lot more work, and most SLR cameras will do a better job of metering than most any hand held meter because you can instantly switch from spot, center weighted, or matrix metering (at least on my Nikons) to suit your lighting conditions. You will lose a lot of shots fiddling w/ the hand held meter, setting the readings on the camera, focusing, and finally pressing the shutter. If you are used to modern AF cameras it will drive you more than a little crazy. People say that shooting a meter-less camera slows you down and improves your photography. That is bull. It slows you down, period.

But I sold my M3 for all these reasons, and after using a lot of other RF cameras, and after looking thru my pictures, I am buying another one. None of the other RF cameras, including the newer Leicas, came close to having as nice a viewfinder or as contrasty a focus patch, and I have come to prefer the look of Leica glass shot w/ B&W film more than my Nikon glass. Also, w/ B&W film you don't have to be spot on w/ your metering because of the huge tonal latitude of the film. If you are shooting slides your goose will be cooked unless you pay very close attention to your scene and ideally bracket your shots. Wait till you do bracketing w/ a meter-less manual camera.

If you are out covering an event for a publication and have to get the shots, you better bring the AF SLR (or DSLR) as they do a better job. But I can't get the look I want w/o the Leica lenses, and I can't get used to the viewfinders of the other cameras, so it is a compromise I will have to make.

 

[srichmond]

Thanks guys. I like the idea of being able to judge for myself, and have tried this a few times. Sleepyhead makes some really good points about metering with B&W too.

 

[oscroft]

I'm no good on sunny-16 either (and I alternate between two different locations where "bright sunlight" is not the same thing). But when I'm shooting with a meterless camera, I don't meter every shot, because that would be very intrusive.

What I do is start out by taking a few measurements of a general scene and get a feel for the range of exposures from direct light to shade, and then I go round adjusting exposure within that range and shooting. I'll only meter again if I think the light has significantly changed, or if sufficient time has passed for the light to have maybe changed without me really noticing it. I find this way of shooting even less intrusive than TTL metering.

I should add, though, that this is only with B&W - if I'm shooting color transparency I'll use a camera with TTL metering.

 

[ruby.monkey]

Sunny 16, previous experience, a Sekonic Twinmate in the pocket for when I'm unsure, and Jonathan Sachs's Expose on my phone as a backup.

 

[sirius]

It sounds tough. It is tough for a little while and you waste a lot of film. But, you learn and grow confident and feel more in creative control of your photography than when you had a meter. You feel more connected to the light around you and your own intuition. It feels liberating after a while. It feels zen that you can just take this mechanical machine out with some film and capture light.

Incident meter for tough scenes or shots where you really care about nailing it. Film has so much latitude and it is forgiving. Most experienced users can land within one stop of a give lighting condition on expeience. It's liberating not to have to feel the need to control the whole process, nor feel that you are letting the camera think and make decisions for you. It helps to use one film at one speed for a while until you really get to know how it responds.

I like the convenience of digital. It's more reliable if I'm being paid for a job. But for my own pleasure, my old film cameras are so much fun to use. It's good to be surprised sometimes!

 

[feenej]

Lately I have been getting better exposures by guessing. My metered photos have been further off. Saturday I shot two rolls of film at a play, and kept thinking that my meter was not right, ended up with both rolls a stop underexposed. Two weeks ago I took some ambient-light studio pictures that should have been no-brainer metered exposures with my Bessa R (which has a good light meter), and it was a stop underexposed. On the other hand, Sunday I shot a roll with my OM-1, with a long dead meter that was all a stop overexposed.

 

[kevin m]

It's kind of counter-intuitive, but with a meterless camera you pay attention to the light, while the tendency with a metered camera is to pay attention to the blinking diodes.

 

[feenej]

You really get two chances to get it right. Your second chance comes when you decide how to develop the film and you then ponder about if you might have been under, or overexposed, then develop accordingly.

(unless the film has been in your camera a long time, and you used it under lots of lighting conditions)

 

[Ronald_H]

Lately I have been getting better exposures by guessing. My metered photos have been further off. Saturday I shot two rolls of film at a play, and kept thinking that my meter was not right, ended up with both rolls a stop underexposed.

That's a wise lesson I learned a while back. If you have a feeling your meter is off, it almost certainly is.

And never thought I would say this, but AE IS distracting. Sunny 16 works well enough, and indoors I usually take one reading and compensate where I think is needed. Many people have said that I shouldn't buy a meterless Leica. Well, I do not agree. The more I shoot with old cameras, the more I feel in control.

Last weekend I did a serious shoot with my Nikon D200. I actually wished it would have been manual. Automation is all well and good and wonderful when you have zero time to think. But it surprises me how little time it actually costs to do it all myself.

 

[Santafecino]

The middle ground is to buy a Leicameter MR for your meterless Leica. Its field of view is rather wide--about 25 degrees, so it's no spot meter. But it's a good CdS cell meter and doesn't add much to the bulk of the camera. I used one on a M3 and a M2 for years and got to like it a lot.

 

[BillP]

The middle ground is to buy a Leicameter MR for your meterless Leica. Its field of view is rather wide--about 25 degrees, so it's no spot meter. But it's a good CdS cell meter and doesn't add much to the bulk of the camera. I used one on a M3 and a M2 for years and got to like it a lot.

Hm.

I wouldn't. While correct to the period, most Leicameters are now showing their age. They can be revived, but at a cost. If you want to mount a meter get a VC one. They are more compact, and modern but still "match" the camera.

More significantly, the Leicameter and the VC Meter are both reflected. with a handheld, you can measure ambient light.

Just try Sunny-16. It works.

Regards,

Bill

 

[oscroft]

It's kind of counter-intuitive, but with a meterless camera you pay attention to the light, while the tendency with a metered camera is to pay attention to the blinking diodes.

That's an excellent way of putting it - I expect I'll plagiarise it in the future 😀

 

[splitimageview]

I agree...this is why I prefer analog displays like the CL as opposed to diodes like the M6. When a diode goes out, how many stops away are you from correct exposure? Sometimes, it's not that far at all, and you'd still get a good shot. With an analog meter, you'll know. With diodes, I spent all my time trying to fine tune the diodes.

Give me an incident meter, or an analog match-needle any day over diodes.

It's kind of counter-intuitive, but with a meterless camera you pay attention to the light, while the tendency with a metered camera is to pay attention to the blinking diodes.

 

[nightfly]

Honestly, I don't think not using a meter is very hard. When I first bought a Rollei TLR I taped a Sunny 16 cheat sheet to the back. I used it for a year or two exclusively and later got an M4-P and I've never metered a shot with either including both slide film and black and white and my exposures are pretty much on. The only caveat being that I don't shoot indoors much but I'm betting if I did, I could meter that myself given a few rolls of experimentation.

I find at least with black and white film that you're developing yourself, you find your own exposure and your whole process becomes integrated into how you like things to look.

The only camera I have with a meter, a Yashica t4, often exposes black and white film not to my liking and I end up with a much less interesting shot than I would have if I did it myself.

I think I'd find a camera with a meter distracting at this point.

Try it.

 

[Austerby]

It's all true:
1. B&W film does have wide latitude
2. You can often get unexpectedly interesting results with "incorrect" exposures
3. You can always bracket exposures if not sure - or as I do just to find out what changes between them
4. The lack of LEDs is liberating
5. It helps to have a hand-held meter to refer to occasionally.

Go for it - what's the worst that can happen?