I use a Pentax digital spot. Easy to use, rugged and reliable.
Another vote for the Pentax, especially if you use the Zone System. Even for BTZS its simplicity makes it very convenient in the field.
I tried a Sekonic L-7xx series and loved its precision and wide range, but found it confusing (some of us are easily confused): too many features. Having both an incident and spot meter in one device was attractive in theory, but less helpful in practice.
For my incident meter I sold the Sekonic and bought a simple, affordable and comparatively small Gossen Digisix.
I have owned a Sekonic L-558 for a very long time and never found a fault in it except for the size. My metering is done primarily with incident, but having the spot meter also is great because there are reasons one would need both methods. If I lost it tomorrow the first thing I would do would be to buy another one.
On the other hand, the little Gossen Digisix that Ken mentioned is a wonderful little meter for incident readings, and could handle about 90% of my metering requirements.
Sandy
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
i would like to extend my thanks to you for the thought provoking and informative replies
my original thoughts have been amended.....
having further researched each suggestion made, I am more or less set on a Pentax digital whether it be original or Zone VI.
and yes I have read the Paul Butzi tests and reprised writings. the following being a quote from the latter
Another possibility is that Picker managed to improve the analog Pentax meter, and perhaps the Soligor digital meter, but that he could not improve the Pentax digital meter. Still, his customers clamored for an 'improved' Pentax Digital Meter, and so he delivered.
so unless some of you think me barmy and can prove it, a Pentax it will be...
once again thank you all
I'm still using the 2nd L508 to ever leave glazers. Variable spot with incident CAN'T be beat. I don't know if newer ones are better, mine ain't broke, and I don't baby it. I didn't think much of the soligar spot meter, so I sold it and got a pentax. I have had both early and late. Both worked fine. At this point I use more incident than spot, but having both is nice. I can't imagine spending the amount of money your going to have to, for an average 30-40 year old unit, throwing the dice on how much longer till it drops, and it is still only a spot meter. NO METER is any more accurate than your PERSONAL calibration test. My late vote and nudge would be for a sekonic model that meets your needs.
I also agree. I used the original Pentax spotmeter for many years, but I had to switch to the Pentax digital spotmeter because of a problem getting batteries for the older meter. Th digital model works fine, and I recently found a solution for batteries for the older meter. So I can, and will, use both.
At one point I tried another manufacturer's meter, but I found it difficult to use, so I returned it.
Just get a Pentax Digital spotmeter, and you will have what you need!
I like the Pentax, but since I owned a L-508 by far I prefer to have spot and incident in the same device. Many times while working with incident readings I end using the spot if the situation is not clear at all... sometimes I prefer to strictly use incident or spot readings depending on the task and format.
I upgraded the L-508 with a L-608 when it was released (just to have in-screen readout when using the spot). Never feel the need of upgrading again.
Besides the L-608 I also have a tiny L-208 for casual incident use with Leicas and other RF cameras. But when I need accuracy and range, the big Sekonic is irreplaceable. I also have some other devices, but in comparison they are worthless to me.
Bookmarks