Shoe Mounted Lightmeter For Leica M Bodies?

[chuckroast]

I want a shoe mounted meter for Leica M bodies. I have the original Revini and I like it, but it eats batteries 🙁

Requirements:

• Shoe mounted
• Good battery life and/or easily and quickly recharged
• Ability to dial in correction

Thoughts?

 

[maddoc]

I use the KEKS small light meter, KM-Q, first version. The new version has added compensation. Battery life is much better compared to the REVINI that I also have. Added plus, it uses USB-C for charging. CON(S), the buttons are a little bit fiddly to use, especially in winter using gloves. I have the version with the top plate read-out, much easier to use for me compared to the REVINI back plate read-out design. The KEKS KM-Q can be bought with back plate read-out, though.

 

[Trask]

I use the KEKS small light meter, KM-Q, first version. The new version has added compensation. Battery life is much better compared to the REVINI that I also have. Added plus, it uses USB-C for charging. CON(S), the buttons are a little bit fiddly to use, especially in winter using gloves. I have the version with the top plate read-out, much easier to use for me compared to the REVINI back plate read-out design. The KEKS KM-Q can be bought with back plate read-out, though.

As I've toyed with the idea of getting a shoe-mount lightmeter myself, I'm curious as to why you prefer the top plate readout (TPR) to the back plate readout (BPR). Don't get me wrong - obviously each user has the right to decide which they want to use -- there's no right or wrong preference! In my imagination, I picture myself looking at what I'm photographing, holding my camera and bringing it toward my eyes in anticipation, and wanting to see what the meter is reading -- with a TPR I'd have the camera maybe around chest level so I could see the TPR but not therefore looking toward the subject, whereas with a BPR I could have the camera at eye level so I could, in a sense, monitor both the exposure readout and the subject at the same time. So -- thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

[Johngwill]

As I've toyed with the idea of getting a shoe-mount lightmeter myself, I'm curious as to why you prefer the top plate readout (TPR) to the back plate readout (BPR). Don't get me wrong - obviously each user has the right to decide which they want to use -- there's no right or wrong preference! In my imagination, I picture myself looking at what I'm photographing, holding my camera and bringing it toward my eyes in anticipation, and wanting to see what the meter is reading -- with a TPR I'd have the camera maybe around chest level so I could see the TPR but not therefore looking toward the subject, whereas with a BPR I could have the camera at eye level so I could, in a sense, monitor both the exposure readout and the subject at the same time. So -- thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I use a top plate readout lightmeter on all my Leica screw mount cameras. For me it seems to be the best solution, I have to look down at the top of the camera to set shutter speed and aperture and directly looking at the meter readout means it is all one operation If it was a front readout I would have to hold the camera up to see the readout and then lower it to set the shutter and aperture, two operations instead of one.

 

[Coldkennels]

+1 for the top plate readout over the back readout.

On the rare occasion where I use an accessory shoe meter over a handheld Weston meter, I find it handy to be able to take a meter reading without bringing the camera up to my face - it's more subtle, and I can do it while I walk around if I'm unsure of the overall light in an area.

It's also worth bearing in mind that most of these meters have truly atrocious "read angles" (I forget the proper term off-hand). It's not really best practice to use them in the same way you'd frame a shot as that typically means you're getting a whole lot of sky in the reading, and that renders the main argument for a back plate reading a bit moot.

All of this aside, if you're using an earlier M body, it's probably worth looking into one of Leica's own accessory meters that couples to the shutter dial. They're quite nifty things, and much more useable (in my opinion) than the LCD-screen-based options available now.

Another consideration, on that note: readability. I wasn't impressed with the KEKS KM-Q light meter in that regard. I prefer the simpler dial-based + coloured LEDs option of the VC Meter and the TTArtisan meter; the recent revision of the TTA meter is a lot better than the original, but it does take an annoying battery size (CR1632). It's good down to about EV2 (that's f/2 and 1 second at 100ISO), but it gets a bit weird at that low end. Still: very useable, quick and easy to operate and understand, and nice and compact.

 

[maddoc]

As I've toyed with the idea of getting a shoe-mount lightmeter myself, I'm curious as to why you prefer the top plate readout (TPR) to the back plate readout (BPR). Don't get me wrong - obviously each user has the right to decide which they want to use -- there's no right or wrong preference! In my imagination, I picture myself looking at what I'm photographing, holding my camera and bringing it toward my eyes in anticipation, and wanting to see what the meter is reading -- with a TPR I'd have the camera maybe around chest level so I could see the TPR but not therefore looking toward the subject, whereas with a BPR I could have the camera at eye level so I could, in a sense, monitor both the exposure readout and the subject at the same time. So -- thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I use the camera with mounted meter the same way as I would use a handheld meter, point it towards the subject and measure reflective metering mode. This way I can easily read the meter, set the shutter speeds, aperture, and distance. I never got along with the M Leica metering systems, looking through the VF and trying to adjust exposure while fiddling and guessing aperture and shutter speed. This also a reason, why I do not like REVENI meter that much. After measuring exposure, you have to bring the camera up or point down to read the exposure then bring the camera down or point it up to set shutter speed and aperture.

On the other hand, I measure exposure perhaps only once or twice a day when out taking photos.

 

[Beemermark]

MR-4 meter

 

[AusDLK]

what Beemermark said. both my M3's sport one.

 

[Trask]

I get it now -- the opportunity to look at the meter, the aperture and the shutter speed. Thanks, everyone!

 

[pvdhaar]

I've got a Leica meter MC for my M4, but never use it. As Leica meters go, their profile is quite high and wide, and they sit over and couple to the shutter speed dial. You really need to be comfortable with that, both from a form factor point of view, as well as from a way of working one.

 

[Beemermark]

couple to the shutter speed dial. You really need to be comfortable with that, both from a form factor point of view, as well as from a way of working one.

Coupling to the shutter speed dial is what makes them so great, You pick a suitable shutter speed for the occasion and then activate the meter with your left finger, read the aperture the needle point to, set the aperture. I can do it faster than I can type how to do it. The meter is heavily weighted to average the area seen by a 90mm lens. A whole lot faster than fiddling with the VC meter on my IIIF or the two LED's in the M6.

 

[justins7]

There are a lot of good shoe-mounted meters out there now. I have a few that I use on my vintage gear. My opinions are below:

• I could not use the Reveni because the battery simply stops working in somewhat cold weather (not even THAT cold — below around 40 degrees F). It's poorly made in my opinion and was not ready for mass production (at least not the one I got).

• I love my "Doomo" brand meter, but it's heavy and a bit slow to use (copy of the older Voigtlander meter with analogue dials). Battery-operated.

• I bought two no-name rechargeable digital meters on Ebay for around $50. They worked well but the internal battery on one of them died less than a year after purchase. So I now realize that the rechargeable ones can quickly become disposable.

• I am now interested in the new "Reflx Lab" meters, which look good and are less than $50.

 

[rumbliegeos]

Coupling to the shutter speed dial is what makes them so great, You pick a suitable shutter speed for the occasion and then activate the meter with your left finger, read the aperture the needle point to, set the aperture. I can do it faster than I can type how to do it. The meter is heavily weighted to average the area seen by a 90mm lens. A whole lot faster than fiddling with the VC meter on my IIIF or the two LED's in the M6.

I am also a real fan of the MR-4 meters, for all the reasons mentioned by Beemermark. I have found mine to be quite accurate. It was serviced by Hollywood Light Metric before they went out of business, but I believe DAG and a company in Germany works on them now.

 

[chuckroast]

My KEKS KM-Q just got delivered and the initial fiddling around looks promising. It's now setup to match my other meters, so we'll see how it does.

 

[Evergreen States]

I am also a real fan of the MR-4 meters, for all the reasons mentioned by Beemermark. I have found mine to be quite accurate. It was serviced by Hollywood Light Metric before they went out of business, but I believe DAG and a company in Germany works on them now.

In the spring of 2024 Don told me the circuit board on my MR-4 was toast and he no longer had replacement circuit boards on hand. Something to be aware of.

 

[shawn]

This could be interesting....

 

[Evergreen States]

This could be interesting....
View attachment 4856899

 

[Beemermark]

I can't figure out what Shawn's posting is referring to.

In the spring of 2024 Don told me the circuit board on my MR-4 was toast and he no longer had replacement circuit boards on hand. Something to be aware of.

Don repaired mine last year and upgraded the circuit to accept a modern 625 battery. If I remember correctly the "electronics" are simply resistors, capacitors, and other components surfaced mounted on a board. Back in the day when I had steadier hands I used to repair surface mounted boards all the time. I used to pick up MR meters when I was doing (film) camera shows bring them home and fix them. Almost all had simple problems like corrosion or something else simple. I still have a box with at least a half dozen dissembled that I never got around to fixing.

 

[Evergreen States]

I can't figure out what Shawn's posting is referring to.

Don repaired mine last year and upgraded the circuit to accept a modern 625 battery. If I remember correctly the "electronics" are simply resistors, capacitors, and other components surfaced mounted on a board. Back in the day when I had steadier hands I used to repair surface mounted boards all the time. I used to pick up MR meters when I was doing (film) camera shows bring them home and fix them. Almost all had simple problems like corrosion or something else simple. I still have a box with at least a half dozen dissembled that I never got around to fixing.

Interesting. I wonder why he could repair yours but not mine. I could probably stand to learn about how to repair electronics hardware like this. Where would you even begin to learn?

 

[Evergreen States]

I can't figure out what Shawn's posting is referring to.

KEKS is a company that makes light meters. Evidently, they have teased on social media that they will be announcing a new model inspired by the Leicameters of yore on the 8th of March this year.