Browsing back over the threads I saw this one, and Kirk's experience doesn't match mine.
So today, I took my three meters (a Zone VI modified Pentax digital spot, an unmodified Pentax Digital Spot, and a Sekonic L-508) outside and did some head to head comparisons.
My test procedure was as follows - for each test situation, I took a reading (carefully metering from the same angle for each test patch) off of each of the 24 color patches on my MacBeth Color checker. I recorded the metered values for each meter on a worksheet.
I ran the test under 3 different lighting conditions: direct sunlight, open shade, and direct sunlight but metering through a B+W 090 (red) filter.
My goal was to see if there were significant variations in readings between meters, and especially between the modified and unmodified Pentax. By metering off the differently colored patches, I could test spectral response as well as just intensity, and by using the Macbeth color checker, other people should be able to replicate my experiment easily (I figure most folks own a Color Checker or can get one easily).
The RMS differences between the modified and unmodified meter in the different situations were: direct sun RMS= 0.16 stop, open shade RMS=0.23 stop, direct sun through 090 filter RMS= 0.20. I did not check to see if there was a systematic bias between the two meters (it's likely there is) nor if removing that bias would reduce the RMS differences between the meters.
That is, I see no statistically meaningful difference between the modified and unmodified meter, reading test patches of various colors, including reading the patches through a red filter.
Both meters seem to be of similar vintage. Interestingly, I did see some significant changes in readings between what I got with a hot meter (left out in sun for a few minutes) and a cool one (taken from cool room). I'll have to perform some more experiments to explore THAT!
Kirk, did you ever compare the modified and unmodified meter head to head?
Bookmarks