Zone VI modification worth the cost?

[Mark Vaughan]

Hello all. I'm new to LF, and very thankful to have found this wonderful resource. I've just purchased a used 4x5 camera, and now I'm begining to "accessorize". My previous experience has been limited to 35mm format (Nikon FE) with built-in metering, which I'm planning to use as my LF meter to start-out with. But after I've begun to familiarize myself with the basics (camera operation, etc.), I'd like to learn how to apply the Zone System. At some point I'll probably want a more accurate means of metering, hence the reason for this post: I've handled the Pentax Digital Spot Meter and like it's simplicity & feel, but I'm curious about the Zone VI modifications - would I'd be better off in the long run to spend the extra money for these features (+$130.00)? Actually, the money isn't too much of an issue - I could afford to spend the extra - but I'm wondering if a person could simply use the "standard" meter and somehow learn to compensate instead? Guess part of my question results from not really understanding the fundamental principals involved. Any thoughts and advice would be greatly appreciated!

[Frank Petronio]

It's not worth it. The stock Pentax digital spot is fine just as it is. You can always learn to bump the green foilage up or down the scale once you understand the principles of the Zone system.

[Bruce E. Rathbun]

Frank is correct. The money spent is not worth the outcome. I would suggest buying a Zone VI viewing filter. A good preview of how the tones look in a monochrome world. Calumet sells them for a round $30.00 I think. Well worth the money.

[Kirk Gittings]

Frank and Bruce reflect my experience precisely. There are much bigger variables to contend with when starting out.

[Tom Duffy]

Actually, I'll take the other side of this arguement. A Zone VI meter is calibrated against the same standard as every other Zone VI meter to within 1/6 stop over its entire range. Lots of other people use them. As a beginner, it would be very helpful to read the archives of this forum or Apug.org, for instance, and read something like, "I rate tri-x at 160, place my shadows on zone IV with my Zone VI meter and develop in pyrocat HD for 8 min at 68F." If you have a Zone VI meter, at least you know that the zone IV they're talking about is your zone IV also. Short of doing your own film testing, it presents a way of eliminating some variables up front.

[Frank Petronio]

To the extent of my limited brain capacity can parse this, if you meter a grey card, the unmodified meter should read exactly the same as the modified one. And I've had several Pentax digital spot meters and - surprise - they all read within 1/3 of a stop. Considering that the meter can only read in 1/3 stop increments, the 1/6 th claim that Zone VI makes (Fred Picker RIP) is just marketing BS.

[Gem Singer]

Hi Mark,

Take a look at the Pentax Spotmeter V. It's an analog meter. Much less expensive than the digital model. It's accurate,simple to understand, and easy to use. I just looked at the K.E.H. website (www.keh.com), and they have quite a few used ones in stock, at very reasonable prices. They also have used Pentax Digital spot meters, including a few ZoneVI modified meters. While you're at it, check out the Minolta Flash meter F. It's an excellent compact spot meter that is capable of reading electronic flash, as well as ambient light. Any spot meter can be used with the Zone system. As Steve Simmons says, "it's not rocket science".

[Michael Kadillak]

The analog V Pentax meter will serve you just fine at this point in your photographic journey. Later on you can consider refining your metering requirements as the need mandates.

The issue Frank is not that a middle grey reading from any brand meter should be within 1/3 stop, the issue is linearity throughout the highs and low readings. Secondly, I like to meter through colored filters rather than use a manufacturers recommendation for a "filter" factor. I did the meter test (factory versus calibrated) many years ago and saw for myself that the new photo cell and modifications according to what I saw were in fact not a bunch of marketing BS. But I will accept the fact that perception can quickly become fact.

I want to feel confident that when I intend to maintain good detail in a shadow, I am not having to worry about it being there. As a result, I rely upon my meter to be accurate and consistent and use a calibrated backup in the closet to check it regularly. When it gets to 1/3 of a stop of error, it goes to the shop to get re-calibrated and the meters change places.

Why put all of your investment in LF equipment at risk of performing at less than optimal when you are photographing with effectively ignoring the requirement for accurate measurement of the energy from which the medium is based upon? And I am not at all concerned about a Zone V meter reading, I am talking about the critical lows and the highs. If you have never had your meter calibrated, have you ever thought of what you consider as acceptable metering? 1/2 stop? 1 stop? After all, it is just a piece of equipment.

Just my $0.02.

[Frank Petronio]

How does one calibrate a meter? The repair guy I know simply compares the suspect meter to several meters he "knows." I'm sure there are more elaborate ways, but wouldn't doing your film speed tests bear that out?

You are right about the linearity, but I've always been in the bad habit of hedging my bets at the high and low end of the spectrum (one is always going to be more important than the other) or I'd use a longer range film (or developer if traditional) in the first place. I probably waste a little more film that way, but I do get the shot.

[Donald Miller]

I've used the unmodified and modified Zone VI Pentax digital meter. My experience is that the internal filters and baffling are not a bunch of hype. The place that I find the modified meter beneficial is in materials that radiate a fairly high amount of IR radiation. Green pine trees is one of those examples. I would wager a fair amount of money that a Zone VI modified and unmodified Pentax meter will show a different reading for those types of materials.

As others have said, you can compensate for the absence of accurate metering. After all, I believe that Edw. Weston never used a meter, to the best of my knowledge. However that was then and this is now. Why not use the best equipment and materials that you can afford.