What is the most reliable, easiest to use, hand-held light meter?

ranger9 said:
A different slant on the original question: Any incident-light meter will be both the most accurate and easiest to use, IF it's always conveniently possible to hold the meter in the same light that's falling on the subject. If you can do this, an incident meter will completely eliminate the need to adjust your meter readings to compensate for the brightness/darkness of the subject. It will quickly give you a reading you can pretty much use as-is, unless you want to tweak your settings to add a little more detail to a very dark or very light subject.

If you can't always put the meter in the same light as the subject, the most accurate and easiest way to get an exposure (IMO) is to use a spot meter to measure the most important highlight area and the most important shadow area, then average those readings.

So for the sake of convenience, you'll want to look for a meter that combines incident and spot reading capabilities. Minolta used to make one, the Flash Meter VI, which was so good that after Minolta got out of the meter business, Kenko bought the rights to make it; good luck finding a clean-and-working Minolta version now, though, and the Kenko version's availability seems to have become spotty. That leaves you looking at several current high-end Sekonic meters such as the L-858; sadly, these are expensive and much bulkier than the Minolta/Kenko meter, but at least you can hit up your favorite retailer today and buy a new one with a warranty...
Click to expand...

I've found I can use an incident light meter for almost anything. I only very very rarely fit the reflected light metering lens on any of my meters, and I get exposure which is spot-on 98% of the time, the remaining 2% being basic pilot error (meaning: I didn't set the aperture or shutter correctly according to what the meter said).

Reflected light meters are far far less consistent. Spot meters even less so ... it takes much more understanding of metering techniques and precise operation to get consistent exposure readings with a spot meter.

G

PS: Both the Li-Ion AAAs for the Sekonic L-478D and the Li-Ion AA for the Sekonic L-328 have now achieved full charge, and both meters are working perfectly again. I use the L-358 so much that all the others tend to sit in the drawer unused for eons. Happily, Eneloop Li-Ion batteries hold their charge for most of an eon... and are forgiving about being recharged as well. ;)
 
When I shot a Leica M3, I used a Sekonic meter though I do not recall the model number. But in one sense that is irrelevant. The point I want to make with this post is to suggest that whatever light meter you choose you may find that there are better (and more convenient) results to be achieved by ambient (incident) light metering- especially if using print film with its inherent exposure latitude. (My meter was capable of both an ambient reading and a reflected light reading off the subject). To be honest a meter with both of these is more convenient though I seldom used the latter. I would usually find that as I entered an environment where I wanted to shoot, I could just take an ambient light reading and then set the exposure based on that. If I wished to expose for shadows I opened it up a stop or so. If I wanted to expose for highlights I stopped it down. And that is all I found it necessary to do. I could then put the meter away and forget about it till I moved somewhere else or the lighting changed for some reason. The only issue these days is that I think these old cadmium cell meters used a mercury battery which is no longer available so an air cell battery may be needed (and these are more expensive and run down quite quickly if exposed to air - though they can be sealed to preserve their life.). Or you would need to make an adjustment based on the difference in voltage between these old batteries and modern ones eith a little experimentation.
 
ranger9 said:
If you can't always put the meter in the same light as the subject, the most accurate and easiest way to get an exposure (IMO) is to use a spot meter to measure the most important highlight area and the most important shadow area, then average those readings.
Click to expand...

This is true--but really, for general purposes with 35mm film, I'd think a spot meter would be inconvenient and, in some ways, overkill. It's generally not too hard, if you're using an incident meter, to put it in a situation that's similar to the lighting on the subject (by, for instance, shading it with your body, or choosing which way to point it), or to take a measure of the overall lighting and estimate how much more or less the thing you're interested in is lit. Heck, with negative film, Sunny F16 will, with experience, get you 90% of the way there already.

Yes, a spot meter would do what I described above even better, given time--but to me, shooting 35mm implies you're shooting fast, and you can generally do what I've described above pretty quickly. Now, If I was shooting large format, and using the zone system in a rather strict way, I'd not be caught dead without a spot meter. Because unlike with 35mm film obviously you can develop each frame individually, and you *need* the information the spot meter provides in order to determine how a particular negative will be developed.

Your point about using a good incident meter is absolutely spot on--with 35mm film, most of the time by far that's going to be the best approach!
 
Depends on _what_ you're shooting. Mighty difficult to use an incident meter for most landscapes and, yes, experience with Sunny16/Grey8 will get you there many times, other times a meter is needed be it spot or reflective.
 
wlewisiii said:
Depends on _what_ you're shooting. Mighty difficult to use an incident meter for most landscapes and, yes, experience with Sunny16/Grey8 will get you there many times, other times a meter is needed be it spot or reflective.
Click to expand...
I often use an incident meter for landscapes....like any meter reading you need to know what you're metering and what outcome you want. I often travel with a Pentax spotmeter and an incident meter. Both have given me reliable results...but in quickly changing light i've had good results with a single quick incident reading.IMG_7612 3.JPG
 
I most often use a Gossen Luna Pro (the old model which used mercury batteries) for Incident readings, yes, even for landscapes which I think it is ideally suited for. I use the official Gossen battery adapter with it which I think sadly has since been discontinued.

For indoor work, or outdoor work in shade or after sunset, I use a Sekonic L-308 in reflective metering mode.
 
I like my Sekonics, L208 and L408.

The 408 has a kind of spotmeter which is useful sometimes, and very precise.
The 208 is Small, light and accurate enough for my use.
 
wrs1145 said:
What do you recommend?
Click to expand...

Any Light Meter Recommendations?

Many years ago I remember using the "sunny 16 guide". My eyesight (and memory) were much better back then. I'm looking for a light meter to use outdoors and for low light shooting. I don't plan on shooting anything with studio lighting, so I'm assuming an ambient meter would work. Also, I...
rangefinderforum.com rangefinderforum.com
 
css9450 said:
I most often use a Gossen Luna Pro (the old model which used mercury batteries) for Incident readings, yes, even for landscapes which I think it is ideally suited for. I use the official Gossen battery adapter with it which I think sadly has since been discontinued.

For indoor work, or outdoor work in shade or after sunset, I use a Sekonic L-308 in reflective metering mode.
Click to expand...
That old Luna Pro is the reason why I sought help here. Best of luck w/ it.
 
A lot has to be said for technique.

Interesting comments from the late Roger Hicks in this thread:

Metering

Here's your assignment.. You have a 35mm camera with a 50mm lens. You point it at a near distant subject with lighting from highlights and shadows like you would see on a sunny day. You set your asa to 100 and shutter speed to 125th. You meter it with the builtin center weighted meter and and...
rangefinderforum.com rangefinderforum.com

Hand the same meter to five different photographers. Ask them to meter the same scene and wrote down their readings for a given shutter speed to the nearest 1/3 or 1/2 stop in lens aperture. I would be astonished if all five readings are identical. Just try it. The total spread might even be more than 1 stop.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Garry Coward-Williams, last editor but one of Amateur Photographer magazine in the UK, phrased this whole question very elegantly.

Given the quite wide variations in readings of the same subject when they are taken by different photographers and with different meters, how is it that so many photographers get adequate, good or even perfect exposures?

My suspicion is that it's because photography is rarely as precise as some people imagine. For "imagine", read in many cases "delude themselves".

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

... If you are striving for maximum "accuracy", you'll use incident light for transparencies and digital (exposure keyed to highlights) if you can -- it's not always feasible -- and true spot metering (1 degree or less) of the shadow areas (NOT mid-tones) for negatives where the exposure is keyed to the shadows or for transparencies and digital when you are forced to read highlight because you can't get close enough with the incident meter.

If you really know what you're doing, in the other hand, you know that just about any metering system can be made to work because you'll know all the "fudge factors". The rest of the time you'll use another metering system or bracket.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...
 
If you want simple and reliable then I'd say go with a meter like the current Sekonic L-398A. They don't require batteries and they last for years - I bought my L398 in college and it's still working perfectly after 30+ years.
 
Last edited:
To me, the big advantage of any hand meter (spot/reflected or incident) is precision. The worst development in TTL meters occurred early-on when manufacturers moved toward center-weighted and, worse, matrix metering. Shooting color transparency film demands extreme accuracy; I never know exactly where the boundaries of the weighted area end, and I certainly don't want some algorithm deciding what the important area is in my subject. I'm always fighting those sorts of meters, and doing a work-around in my shooting style when using them. Usually, I just go with a separate incident reading.
Do those sorts of TTL meters work for many (if not most) photographers? Of course! I'm referring to the very specific and unforgiving process of shooting color transparency film. But over the years, the metering techniques that I've found necessary for those films have served me very well for every type of film in all situations. Getting exposure perfect makes all the post-exposure work (darkroom or digital) simpler, and leads to better image quality. And of course, with transparencies, there's no second chance to "fix it in post".
 
Ok, on the lighter side, a Dick Tracy wrist meter :)

www.photrio.com

Wearable light meter

This isn't an original idea. It's the first time I've tried it. I find it quite handy, although the meter is much taller than a typical wristwatch and I think I might eventually snag it on something. I printed it in PETG, but when I change out the filament to reinforced nylon I'll make one out...
www.photrio.com www.photrio.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom