Ken_Watson
Member
Do you use a handheld light meter for outside / general photography even if you have a built in light meter in your camera?
I'm talking outside photography here. The advantages of using such a device for studio set ups etc. are obvious.
I've just bought a basic little Sekonic model as an experiment to see if incident light readings give a more consistently accurate result than the camera's built in reflected light meter.
Not surprisingly the Sekonic produces more accurate exposures when shooting predominantly dark or very bright subjects and the camera and light meter are generally in agreement on midtoned subjects.
No doubt the experienced photographers on the forum who are very conversant with the performance of their camera and perhaps also have good intuition with regards to ambient light levels will be able to estimate an exposure / F stop combination without looking at a meter. I'm not quite there yet but I'm at the stage now where I can guess fairly close to the right exposure before checking the meter.
So, for those of you that use an incident meter for general photography, how often do you use one?
Do you find it a godsend or cumbersome extra bit of kit to cart around?
Do you find that you get more consistently accurate results than your camera meter?
Do you find that an incident light meter slows you down or enables you to be one step ahead for the next shot?
I'm interested to know your thoughts and experiences.
I've done a limited number of comparison shots up to now using my X100 as its a fast and convenient way of comparing the digital images as metered by the camera and the Sekonic.
My next experiment is to shoot a roll in my M6 using the M6's meter and the Sekonic to see how that compares.
Thoughts, opinions gentlemen?
I'm talking outside photography here. The advantages of using such a device for studio set ups etc. are obvious.
I've just bought a basic little Sekonic model as an experiment to see if incident light readings give a more consistently accurate result than the camera's built in reflected light meter.
Not surprisingly the Sekonic produces more accurate exposures when shooting predominantly dark or very bright subjects and the camera and light meter are generally in agreement on midtoned subjects.
No doubt the experienced photographers on the forum who are very conversant with the performance of their camera and perhaps also have good intuition with regards to ambient light levels will be able to estimate an exposure / F stop combination without looking at a meter. I'm not quite there yet but I'm at the stage now where I can guess fairly close to the right exposure before checking the meter.
So, for those of you that use an incident meter for general photography, how often do you use one?
Do you find it a godsend or cumbersome extra bit of kit to cart around?
Do you find that you get more consistently accurate results than your camera meter?
Do you find that an incident light meter slows you down or enables you to be one step ahead for the next shot?
I'm interested to know your thoughts and experiences.
I've done a limited number of comparison shots up to now using my X100 as its a fast and convenient way of comparing the digital images as metered by the camera and the Sekonic.
My next experiment is to shoot a roll in my M6 using the M6's meter and the Sekonic to see how that compares.
Thoughts, opinions gentlemen?