- This topic is empty.
Is a hand-held meter useful?
-
I’m probably opening an old can of worms here! Recently bought a Pentax 67ii film camera (with built-in meter), and, although I’ve only done a few b/w test shots, I’m reasonably happy with the results. However, having read several online articles on the benefits of using a hand-held meter, I’m wondering whether I should get one. They’re reasonably cheap second hand.
The main benefits mentioned are (1) they’re more accurate in certain difficult situations and (2) they’re good for learning and understanding aperture/shutter speed relationships.
Any thoughts?
Due to the accuracy & variation of metering modes in digital cameras these days, a handheld meter tends to be a non runner for most DSLR users. Handheld meters tend to be in the same boat as film ie out of fashion for the vast majority, but this is not to say that they are obsolete, but rather that we as “digital” photographers have gotten a little lazy. Many subjects can be metered without much difficulty using the built in metering modes, but for the most accurate metering, we don’t always use the best mode for the subject in front of the camera. A lot of people don’t know which mode to use & just use an average meter reading & fix it during post processing. Digital photographers also tend to “work faster” than film users.
For film work, I would say that a handheld meter is essential rather than useful. For difficult subjects such as a bride & groom under a tree on a sunny day, a handheld meter can work wonders. For digital, using a handheld meter can slow us down & by doing so, can actually make us pay more attention to what we are actually shooting & therefore give better results, rather than a spray & pray approach.Thanks for the input miki g. I was thinking more about my film work. It seems that incident metering is the most useful there.There are small meters going for a song on eBay, so I might get one of those.
I shoot all my landscape work on film. There’s a couple of items that I can’t work without, one is a light meter. It’s the same meter I’ve had for 13 years, and I know it’s spot on. If you’re shooting film, use a light meter, simple as!
The meter I have doesn’t correspond to what a digital camera reads, it used to be around 1 1/2 stops out…but I think there are digital meters around, but they’re not really needed, you have an lcd screen!incident metering is for flash – it measures the light from the incident (flash firing) rather than more general ambient light.
digital meters are not for digital cameras it means they have a digital display. differences between what a meter reads and what a built in meter on the camera say are more likely due to differences in setting on the camera ie center weighted average, average or spot.
i use an old weston master 4. they are cheap, attractive and do not require batteries (although i could probably do with having the solenoid replaced but i find it works as well as i need it to).
if i had a lot of money i would buy a soligor spot meter as spot metering is what i prefer but i manage fine without.
good luck
Without getting too technical, incident metering is I can assure you for ambient lighting also- simply put incident light meters measure the amount of light falling on the subject. I shoot landscapes, never with flash and use an incident meter – Minolta autometer IV. And there are meters out there that are specifically for digital cameras, Sekonic do them I think.
Again there are differences in what an oldish meter reads (minolta autometer IV) and what a digital camera would read. If it’s bright & sunny outside my meter would read, say 1/500 at F8 (asa 100), my digital camera would say 1/500 at F10 or 11. (I know these readings from years of shooting in bright sunny weather with film).of course an incident meter will read ambient light but an ambient light meter will not read incident light. if you do not intend to meter flash you do not need to use an incident light meter.
meters made before 1980 use a different type of cell to measure the light and so can be somewhat less sensitive compared to ones made more recently. any light meter that will work for film will work for digital.
perhaps you are thinking of a meter that will give a readout in increments as small as the ones you can get with a digital camera. ie there is no f10 on a film camera
I would be of the opinion that Incident light is the light reflected from the subject, whereas ambient light is the light falling on the subject. The light can be either natural or artifical in either case.
If I meter a subject using an incident light reading ( such as in camera), the meter reading can be affected by the colour of the subject.For example, A red rose may give a different reading from a yellow rose in exactly the same lighting, especially when there is a dominant colour in the scene. By taking an ambient light reading from the subjects position using a handheld meter & measuring the actual light falling on the subject, you will get the same reading, regardless of the subjects colour. For this reason, ambient readings tend to be more accurate in scenes where a single dominant colour can affect the readings. It shouldn’t matter if you are using either film or digital cameras.
perhaps you are thinking of a meter that will give a readout in increments as small as the ones you can get with a digital camera. ie there is no f10 on a film camera
Nope, my meter is relatively modern, late 90’s, it reads in half stops, like my hasselblad. My other film cameras, Canon eos, do have 1/3 increments so I can use F10.
Getting back to the main question – if you’re shooting film, get yourself a meter. If you’re shooting digital, don’t bother save your money.
sure, you’re right. my graflex and large format lenses do have stops in between but they are not marked so i do not think of them in numbers.
my meter is old, reads things in between and does not mark them in numbers either.
so ya, all around wrong.
but meters are useful
Incident meters measure the strength of light which falls on the scene, not the light reflected by it. They are the easiest meter to use as they are not fooled by bright or dark areas of the scene.
Reflective meters measure the light reflecting off the subject. Bright and dark areas of the scene may cause the meter to give you inaccurate readings. This is where a reflective spot meter is ideal as it can be used to measure different parts of the scene independently. Then using proper exposure and development techniques (i.e. zone system), optimum results can be achieved. If this does not appeal to you then just spot meter a grey card or use an incident meter (will give same result) and you’ll get satisfactory readings.
Some hand held meters have both incident and reflective modes on them which is handy.
I think between us all we’ve got it right somewhere!
Incident meters measure the strength of light which falls on the scene, not the light reflected by it. They are the easiest meter to use as they are not fooled by bright or dark areas of the scene.
– which is why I use them for landscapes. Issues occur when shooting backlit scenes, but lets not go there…lets just say experience helps then!! :lol:
markcapilitan wrote:
I think between us all we’ve got it right somewhere!
Incident meters measure the strength of light which falls on the scene, not the light reflected by it. They are the easiest meter to use as they are not fooled by bright or dark areas of the scene.
– which is why I use them for landscapes. Issues occur when shooting backlit scenes, but lets not go there…lets just say experience helps then!! :lol:
Exactly. Terminology can be so confusing. :oops: :lol:
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
