Use a DSLR to calculate exposure?

[Marko]

And Marko, which is the "correct" exposure? lol

Now, that's a political question and you know by now that I am not overly politically correct...

[Ron Bose]

My exposures are NOT perfect -- I'm off by a half a stop quite often, maybe over a stop sometimes in extreme lighting situations... it's not the end of the world (in most cases). I've watched enough other photographers in the field to realize that even devout Zone System practitioners often don't do any better.

We ought to remember that newbie photographers need a little more encouragement and not be overwhelmed by "needing" this and that. They don't!

Frank,
If you asked the question I'd say go for it, you have the experience to know what to do with a meter reading from your camera and how to compensate due to your years of experience and great results ... I also agree that you don't need to be a follower of the Zone System to get good exposures.

Marko, you asked which image was which. Again, I'd say that an experienced photographer who understands how either type of metering works and how to interprete it, compensate, then dial it into your lens will get the right exposure.

I know enough about how different shades of grey are present in my scene and what I need to do to get enough of them on the neg so I can make a half-decent print.

To be brutally honest, all I do is find something near 18% grey and meter, then look at the darkest spot I want detail in, meter and then make sure that the two point to the same exposure values. This to me was enough to start with and then you go from there ...

I'm not the greatest photographer here, far from it and having said all of this I dream of the day I can make images like Frank :-)

[Stephen Benskin]

Marko,

If you notice my response was to the false statement that ISO for analog is the same for digital. The ISO standard for film or digital has only to do with the materials. There's a separate ISO standard for light meters, and even then, the actual parameters on exposure aren't listed in any standard. You have to go back to the original scientific papers for tha

Here's a hint about exposure. The basic exposure constant is P = 8 mc. This is what your light meter and the exposure formula look for before factoring in shutter speed which is applied through the exposure calculator. You can find more in Connelly, D., Calibration Levels of Films and Exposure Devices, Journal of Photographic Science, Vol. 16, 1968.

And the part about using a digital camera for an exposure meter, Edward Weston never used a meter. In fact, meters weren't that universally used until the fifties. Many people used exposure charts and calculators. There's an ISO standard based on the research of Loyd Jones that is said to be so accurate, if used properly, that if your light meter disagrees with the data from the standard, your meter is probably wrong.

Let's not forget that disposable cameras produce acceptable results in a majority of situations and they not only don't have meters, they have a fixed aperture and shutter. Really, most of the time exposure isn't a big deal. It's when you encounter the more extreme or unusual situations where the difficulties lie.

Steve

[argos33]

I have used a DSLR to meter for LF slide film with great results. Yes the two are obviously different, but if you can experiment enough to be able to compensate for that difference you should be fine.

[Jon Warwick]

Thanks for the replies so far.

I fully agree that the DSLR will get confused by some lighting situations if not thoughtfully used.

However, as already mentionned by a few people above, perhaps the main benefit of using the DSLR will be "cheap polaroids".

I'll be taking a hand-held meter along too. By applying its readings onto my DSLR (which will be in manual mode) and taking a photo with the DSLR, I'm hoping that the DSLR preview screen will effectively act as a reliable substitute for taking a polaroid.

[Ben Calwell]

The importance of the histogram has been mentioned. Maybe I don't understand it completely, but I've never understood why looking at the histogram is important. Can't most experienced photographers, with the help of their exposure meters, simply look at a scene and tell which parts of it are likely to be overexposed or underexposed? I don't need a histogram to tell me that. What can a histogram tell me that I don't already know?

[Kirk Gittings]

Ben see this on ETTR exposure:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...se-right.shtml

[D. Bryant]

The importance of the histogram has been mentioned. Maybe I don't understand it completely, but I've never understood why looking at the histogram is important. Can't most experienced photographers, with the help of their exposure meters, simply look at a scene and tell which parts of it are likely to be overexposed or underexposed? I don't need a histogram to tell me that. What can a histogram tell me that I don't already know?

Or read this article:

http://www.digitalphotopro.com/tech/...g-for-raw.html

Don Bryant