Light Meter for Large Format (4x5) Landscape Photography

[bmoffitt1990]

I am looking for a relatively ~150$ cheap light meter for a large format camera I just picked up.

Are there any specific models you would recommend?

[Alan9940]

Spot or incident? I'd guess that finding a good spot meter in your price range is going to be tough; more choices on the incident side. The Sekonic L-308 is very popular.

[giganova]

I'm a big fan of Gossen, particularly the Digisix (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/918762-REG/gossen_go_4006_2_digisix_2_light_meter.html?sts=pi&pim=Y) or Sixtomat (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1016936-REG/gossen_go_h264a_sixtomat_f2_exposure_meter.html).

[klw]

You could use an Lightmeter app on your phone (~2$)

[Willie]

CalcuLight X or XP still work well.
The XP will give you readings by the light of a quarter moon.
Incident and reflected light readings as well as an attachment that allows you to meter directly on your ground glass.

Small, lightweight and they just keep on working.

[John Layton]

The old (pre-digital) Pentax "Spot-5" spot meter, if you can find one in good working order...is a great meter, especially if its been "Zone-VI Modified." Another choice would be the old Soligor spot meter. Not sure about parts/repair availability for either of these though, but I've seen each of these meters priced well within your desired range.

[rfesk]

I have found that a lightmeter app on my phone is very useful.

[bmoffitt1990]

Spot or incident? I'd guess that finding a good spot meter in your price range is going to be tough; more choices on the incident side. The Sekonic L-308 is very popular.

Well - this was another question I had actually, but I didnt want to bring it up in the "gear" section. For landscape photography, which light meter would be better?

Everything I have read said that if you can get a spot meter, then get a spot meter. Wondering what the community thinks.

[lassethomas]

Well - this was another question I had actually, but I didnt want to bring it up in the "gear" section. For landscape photography, which light meter would be better?

Everything I have read said that if you can get a spot meter, then get a spot meter. Wondering what the community thinks.

From my point of view the choice of meter is related to type of film.
For black and white and color neg I tend to use a incident meter.
For slide film a spotmeter is essential I think, to help to evaluate and guard the highlights.

[Neal Chaves]

A small digital camera with full manual capability and a zoom lens, like the discontinued Fujifilm X10 can provide more useful exposure information than any light meter I have ever used, and there have been many. I seem to remember that Fred Picker wrote that evaluating a Polaroid was more accurate than even his exotic spot meter (which I once owned and eventually sold, never to be missed).

[f9likethekey]

+1 for pentax spotmeter. You'll notice after research that a lot of books and courses related to shooting film rely heavily on a spot meter. There is a reson for this as it gives the most accurate results (IMO). I have used incident meters in the past and then bought a minolta spotmeter f. World of difference and once I got the hang of it, my metering sped up significantly. I recently traded the minolta for a pentax spotmeter and I wouldn't use any other meter at this point. I've seen the older ones (just as accurate when calibrated) and they're also phenominal machines. I'd stalk the *bay and look for a deal. Remember you can always send it out for calibration.

[Alan9940]

Well - this was another question I had actually, but I didnt want to bring it up in the "gear" section. For landscape photography, which light meter would be better?

Everything I have read said that if you can get a spot meter, then get a spot meter. Wondering what the community thinks.

I shoot primarily outdoor scenes of all variety and I've only ever used a spot meter. If you plan to shoot B&W using some form of the zone system, a spot meter is essential. However, if you really want to "deep dive" and follow Phil Davis teachings, then, I believe, an incident meter is used. For B&W and color neg film, I use a Pentax Digital Spot meter. For color transparency, I use a Sekonic L-558 spot meter because it has a very unique feature; I can meter a shadow area where I want to hold detail and store that reading, meter a high value area where I want detail and store that reading, then average the two. But, there's more...then, while holding the metering button down I can scan the scene looking at the EV variance. I find this extremely helpful to determine if I want to adjust the average exposure reading. All that said, each photographer has his/her way of working and you will eventually determine what works best for you.

[rdenney]

The spot meter supports approaches like the Zone System, where you intentionally place the brightness of specific details of the scene into target tones on your print. There is a lot of craft that goes into actually getting those detail brightness levels to those tones, and that's what the Zone System is all about. But it starts with the ability to measure the brightness of those details in the scene.

If you don't explore those approaches, you can get away with just about any hand-held light meter. I have everything from a vintage Vivitar Model 43 (actually a very decent meter) to a Sekonic L-718. For large format, I still use one of my Pentax Spot V's, though those d'arsonval meters in them are starting to get a bit flaky. The electronic spot meters tend to read out in exposure rather than in EV, and so require more mental arithmetic to get zone readings. The mechanical calculator dial on the Pentax is a big reason why it is so popular, because one can scan all the zones at once.

Had I to learn it all over again, I'd probably use a digital camera to determine exposure, which requires enough experience to learn how the sensor in the digital camera and the film in the large-format camera respond differently. But the photos I take on the digital camera have near-zero marginal cost.

Rick "digital is the new Polaroid" Denney

[bmoffitt1990]

From my point of view the choice of meter is related to type of film.
For black and white and color neg I tend to use a incident meter.
For slide film a spotmeter is essential I think, to help to evaluate and guard the highlights.

If you're shooting a landscape and your subject is far away, and has different lighting than what is available around you, are you hosed? How can you tell what the luminance is on your subject?

[bmoffitt1990]

+1 for pentax spotmeter. You'll notice after research that a lot of books and courses related to shooting film rely heavily on a spot meter. There is a reson for this as it gives the most accurate results (IMO). I have used incident meters in the past and then bought a minolta spotmeter f. World of difference and once I got the hang of it, my metering sped up significantly. I recently traded the minolta for a pentax spotmeter and I wouldn't use any other meter at this point. I've seen the older ones (just as accurate when calibrated) and they're also phenominal machines. I'd stalk the *bay and look for a deal. Remember you can always send it out for calibration.

The *bay lmao...Is that a faux pas in these forums?

Where can I send it out to get calibrated?

[bmoffitt1990]

The spot meter supports approaches like the Zone System, where you intentionally place the brightness of specific details of the scene into target tones on your print. There is a lot of craft that goes into actually getting those detail brightness levels to those tones, and that's what the Zone System is all about. But it starts with the ability to measure the brightness of those details in the scene.

If you don't explore those approaches, you can get away with just about any hand-held light meter. I have everything from a vintage Vivitar Model 43 (actually a very decent meter) to a Sekonic L-718. For large format, I still use one of my Pentax Spot V's, though those d'arsonval meters in them are starting to get a bit flaky. The electronic spot meters tend to read out in exposure rather than in EV, and so require more mental arithmetic to get zone readings. The mechanical calculator dial on the Pentax is a big reason why it is so popular, because one can scan all the zones at once.

Had I to learn it all over again, I'd probably use a digital camera to determine exposure, which requires enough experience to learn how the sensor in the digital camera and the film in the large-format camera respond differently. But the photos I take on the digital camera have near-zero marginal cost.

Rick "digital is the new Polaroid" Denney

I picked up Barnbaums book before I got into 35mm and got really into the zone system. I am an engineer by trade, so the technical aspect of photography is very interesting to me.

Seems like I should pick up a spot meter...

[rfesk]

BTW, my light meter app has a spot meter function plus averaging etc.

[Drew Wiley]

I've standardized on Pentax digital spotmeters for many years now, for every format. Maybe that doesn't fit your cost parameters. But a few years ago I stumbled upon an almost brand new one at a ridiculously low price. So luck and timing is a factor.

[bmoffitt1990]

BTW, my light meter app has a spot meter function plus averaging etc.

I wonder what the accuracy is compared to a spot meter. Would be really interested to see a robust study because this would obviously be the most cost effective option.

[lassethomas]

If you're shooting a landscape and your subject is far away, and has different lighting than what is available around you, are you hosed? How can you tell what the luminance is on your subject?

Well, yes, in that case, then a spot meter would be handy.
Of course there are black and white landscapes that would benefit from a spot meter, but in my experience that is not very often.
Usually you can most of the dynamic range of a scene within the parameters of the film, and the penalties for overexposing are not as harsh as with slide film.

But if you using the zone system and want to place your scene within that, a spot meter is the way to go.

I think my struggles with spot meters is the actually process. It takes too long time, and it makes you focus too much on technical issues and parts of the composition, instead of the being in the place and taking in the whole composition. If that makes any sense.
A good incident meter, that you learned to use, and compensate for, is more versatile to me for b/w and color eng.

With that said, whatever meter you get, you need to spend a lot of time and film to learn it.
A light meter may be based on science but your exposures are not.

[esearing]

Save up and buy a SPOT, flash, and Incident combo meter like the Sekonic L508, L558, L608, or L758 (used). You will likely only ever need the one meter no matter what type of photography you do, Except maybe very low light. If you happen to need low light there are incident light models that will go as low as -4EV @ ISO 100. Sekonic L448.

[Tin Can]

Agree

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00562/00562.pdf

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

Agree

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00562/00562.pdf

I prefer Sekonic, too, especially the L28c2. It costs ~40 USD on ebay ... They work accurately without battery. Even when it's cold or hot. Incident light with Rodinal 1+100 or HC110 H 1+63 is quite uncomplicated.

But the Gossen Mastersix / Ultra Pro is a very useful device, too, on which you can put a 7,5° tele attachment.

[Ironage]

+1 on the Sekonic L28. Simple, incident, no battery.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pendennis]

I own several -

Pentax Digital Spot Zone VI converted
Soligor Spot Zone VI converted
Soligor Spot (unconverted)
Sekonic L508
Gossen Luna Pro SBC


The purpose built spot meters are all accurate to within 1/3 EV (tested against a known grey background and constant illumination.

A good Soligor can be had on eBay, for around $70. The Pentaxes, whether analogue or digital, are reaching "astronomical" prices. However, I managed to find my Sekonic for $100 on Craig's List, and it really does great.

[Peter Collins]

Pentax DIGITAL spotmeter. I have a friend who dropped his Pentax analog while photographing in Europe. Became a big problem.

[grat]

I think my struggles with spot meters is the actually process. It takes too long time, and it makes you focus too much on technical issues and parts of the composition, instead of the being in the place and taking in the whole composition. If that makes any sense..

I must be doing something wrong. I picked up an analog Cambron (ie, Soligor) spot meter in good condition (Still in the carry case, where it has obviously lived most of it's life), and metering has always been fairly simple, or at least, the way I approach it.

For the vast majority of scenes, I meter the darkest and lightest areas of the composition, determine the EV range of the scene, and assuming there are fewer than 7 stops of range, I split the difference, and use the midpoint for my exposure. I realize there are scenes that I might want to capture that will challenge this method, but so far every shot I've metered this way has come out fine.

Personally, it's only a few seconds to get the readings, and then do a quick lookup (Eventually, I'll learn the tables, but for now, I have to look up the aperture/speed combinations).

I think working with the EV numbers simplifies the process tremendously. My only complaint with the meter is I can't read it in the dark (analog meter instead of digital readout).

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

Hi, it seems that really all modern light meters since 1980 are suitable, and above all they are not expensive, because current cameras all have a built-in light meter with many refinements .

Today I was in our local forest in pouring rain. I wanted to take pictures of trees in the fog, without shadows or background structures, in black and white. Despite the huge golf umbrella, which I attached to my tripod with a Manfrotto clamp, the equipment got a little wet. It seems that the humidity of the air condensed on the cold equipment.

In this setting the light meter had to meet several requirements that I don't think about that often, as I remarked today.

1. it had to have enough surface area to stick on tables that listed the Schwarzschild/reciprocity factors for each film on the one hand, and the prolongation factors for macro extensions and filters on different lenses on the other. Especially in the rain, you don't want to calculate too much anymore.

2. it must be reasonably waterproof. Sure, you can also put it in a nylon bag. But that falsifies the measurement.

3. it must display contrast ranges quickly and easily, especially for multiple measurements with averaging.

4. it must have a telephoto or spot function so that you can stay under the umbrella.

5. it needs a cord to hang the light meter around your neck because you only have two hands and your hands are wet.

If you really want to spend 150 USD, you should consider the Sekonic L408, for example. https://www.manualslib.com/manual/663229/Sekonic-Multimaster-L-408.html#manual

This light meter is waterproof, has 5° spot as a fixed telescope, averaging, light metering, it shows contrast ranges on an aperture scale, it has a cord, and it has enough space to attach all kinds of additional information on it, which makes it more valuable. It is also very light and more compact than the big L508, L558 or L758 with the rotating head that can break off. It runs on standard AA batteries, which can be purchased anywhere. It is a pity that such a thing is no longer produced today.

The Sekonic L408 can be used with restrictions for the zone system. The first limitation is the measuring angle of 5°. The second is the averaging, which only takes 3 measurements into account. But this is enough to measure III and VII.

If you like backuping, also in terms of exposure meters, you could put a L408 together with an even lighter Sekonic L308 in your photo bag. The L308 - the little brother of the L408, is very small, and it seems to me that it is one of the lightest light meters available today. Both light meters are very reliable.

[f9likethekey]

The *bay lmao...Is that a faux pas in these forums?

Where can I send it out to get calibrated?

I've used Quality Light Metric in the past with great service. They're out of CA.

[Drew Wiley]

Spotmeters with readable dials are the fastest and most intuitive of all, at least if you want accuracy. But which ever method you choose, sheer familiarity and practice are what count. The Zone System is something else entirely; and it and spotmeters are not necessarily married together. Hollywood uses more spotmeters than all of us put together. That's why Quality Light Metric is in the same area. And just look at the IRE scale on the Pentax.

[Alan Klein]

I started experimenting with using a micro 4/3 digital digital camera as my meter.

It provides the following advantages:
1. Histogram
2. Spot meter especially when zoomed in
3. Allows me to find the picture I want without lugging around the 4x5 and tripod until I found the exact location. I set it to 4:3 which closely matches the 4x5 format. When I find the picture, I just set the tripod.
4. Zoom allows me to frame the shot and know which lens to use before setting up the 4x5
5. If shooting BW, I can switch camera to BW to see the scene without color.
6. Check the exposure on the screen along with the histogram.
7. Snap a shot to record the scene and settings for future reference. Or videography it and record my settings verbally for transcription at home.

Disadvantages:

1. Not as handy as a dedicated meter
2. F/22 is smallest aperture for micro 4/3. Other P&S may be much larger.
3. No incident readings.

I'm still learning and playing with it. So I won't make any claims as to final results. Anyone got any ideas how to improve the operation, I'd be glad to hear from you.

[tgtaylor]

I purchased a Pentax digital spot meter new in 2000 and did extensive side-by-side comparisons with the in-camera meter of my Pentax 67II camera which I also purchased new. Both gave identical readings. When I added LF a couple of years later I used the Pentax spot exclusively for all LF up to and including 810 format until I replaced it with the Sekonic L-758dr. Before selling the Pentax spot I tested against the Sekonic and found that the readings were identical once the readings were correlated (the Sekonic reads to the 1/10 aperture while the Pentax to the 1/3). The bottom line for me was although the Sekonic was more expensive than the Pentax it was the better meter considering the slightly more accurate reading and the size and weight in the supplied holster was less thn the Pentax in its Zone VI holster. So I sold the Pentax for close to what I paid for it new and kept the Sekonic.

Thomas

[Drew Wiley]

Thomas, my P67 meter readings drifted over time. I still use that particular meter-prism, but never the internal meter itself. Nor did I try to get it recalibrated. My next prism purchase was meterless. My spotmeters, on the other hand, are not only capable of being recalibrated, but have never been more than 1/3 out of sync with each other (all read perfectly linear to each other for about a decade or so, until periodic service) and do indeed read discrete small areas rather than just averaging. Even with my Nikon, which has a good TTL system, I always use a Pentax spotmeter handheld, or risk miscalculations. A rare exception would be quickie snapshooting in the rain with a highly forgiving film like Delta 3200. I once had a Minolta spotmeter too, which read identically to the Pentax ones, but was less intuitive to read.

[tgtaylor]

My 67II is 20 years old this month and so far I haven't noticed any change in the metering and rarely, if ever, use an outside meter (it has a built-in 1 degree spot meter). Only rarely have I encountered a poorly exposed frame which I attribute to being user error as 99.99% of my images are shot with mirror up and the lens closed down. But then I haven't been using it as much as I once did due to adding a variety of different large formats as well as 645 and Nikon F6. Recently added a 2d F6 so that I can shoot both B&W and E6 on the same outing with auto focus lenses and as with the 2 Pentax MF don't need to carry a separate meter. (Below is a recent E6 exposure [Kodak Eltachrome E100] taken along Calaveras Road in the East Bay about 2 weeks before the present fires with the F6 using its matrix metering function.) Likewise I had no problems with the Pentax digital spot meter during the 15 or so years before switching to the Sekonic and only switched after testing the 2 side-by-side for a week before keeping the Sekonic.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50292356738_dbc2d18e88_z.jpg

Thomas

[Jim Jones]

For several decades and many cameras, my most often used meter was a Weston Master II or equivalent. Like a Vice grip, it was rarely the perfect tool on any occasion, but it was the best wrong tool thousands of times. Magnificent photographs were produced 150 years ago by photographers who made the most out of whatever they had. Mastering modest tools beats struggling with perfect ones.

[Drew Wiley]

I have a very early Weston meter that still functions, inherited from my older brother. More of a conversation piece than anything practical. I've worked completely meterless, even getting perfect chrome exposures, just by sheer memory from many analogous lighting situations. But since there's no guarantee my memory itself won't drift, and don't know anyone capable of cleaning the slowly corroding battery contacts inside my brain, I feel a lot more secure having a reliable meter along.

[Drew Bedo]

You could use an Lightmeter app on your phone (~2$)

Are they \really any good? I mean good enough for LF?

For years, I have used a Minolta Autometer IV f, sometimes with a spot attachment.

Works for me. Find 'em on e-Bay.

[Tobias Key]

I got a Gossen Spot Master for £90 on ebay but I think I was quite lucky. I was the only person to bid on it I presume because it is a lesser known meter, but is accurate and very sophisticated. The only downside is its size (it's pretty big and heavy for a meter) and it has no external display, you can only see the readings through the eyepiece. But it has a dedicated zone system mode and multi-spot metering and that is more than enough for me. I believe it is called the ultra-spot in the US.

[rfesk]

The app I use is the Lumu. It has both spot and averaging and many other features. Spot doesn't seem to be 1 degree but that is fine for my purposes.
Very simple to use. My down load was free but upgrades are available I believe.

[klw]

Are they \really any good? I mean good enough for LF?

For years, I have used a Minolta Autometer IV f, sometimes with a spot attachment.

Works for me. Find 'em on e-Bay.

They work quite well. For BW they are good enough in most situations. I do carry a spotmeter as well – but do not need it too often.

I would't rely on them for shooting slides.

[6x6TLL]

I have 2 meters, both bought new.

A Gossen Variosix-F that I've probably had for 20 years, with the 5 degree spot attachment (wish it did 1 degree, but oh well) has been my main meter through multiple cameras. My current Rollei 6008i2 has a 1 degree spot with multi-mode built in, but I still find the Gossen useful.

When I later landed on the Rollei 2.8 TLR as my "travel" camera I needed a new meter, as the Variosix is almost half the size of the TLR. So I bought a small, palm sized Digisix, also from Gossen.

Both meters still work fine, although the rotating head on the Variosix has come loose and flops around. I asked Gossen if I could get it repaired and they unfortunately said no. At some point I'll have to step up and get a new meter, the Seikonic's look nice and seem to offer many of the same features (multi-spot, EV range of a scene, flash sync, etc).

Just another data point to consider.

[tonyowen]

Reading this thread raises the question is there any correlation between the reading on digital camera's in-built meter and the reading of a handheld meter?

Given that both are reflective meters and given the same angle of reading.

An in-built meter in a digital camera is designed and calibrated for a digital image produced by that particular camera.
Whereas a handheld meter is designed for analogue images from any camera.

Or do both have to be compared on a 'grey card' or similar and the/a correction factor determined

Regards
Tony

[Alan Klein]

I have 2 meters, both bought new.

A Gossen Variosix-F that I've probably had for 20 years, with the 5 degree spot attachment (wish it did 1 degree, but oh well) has been my main meter through multiple cameras. My current Rollei 6008i2 has a 1 degree spot with multi-mode built in, but I still find the Gossen useful.

When I later landed on the Rollei 2.8 TLR as my "travel" camera I needed a new meter, as the Variosix is almost half the size of the TLR. So I bought a small, palm sized Digisix, also from Gossen.

Both meters still work fine, although the rotating head on the Variosix has come loose and flops around. I asked Gossen if I could get it repaired and they unfortunately said no. At some point I'll have to step up and get a new meter, the Seikonic's look nice and seem to offer many of the same features (multi-spot, EV range of a scene, flash sync, etc).

Just another data point to consider.

How do you use the 5 degree spot? I ask because I have a 10 degree with my Minolta meter.

[Greg]

Over the years have owned and used way, way too many exposure meters.

Spotron Professional Spot meter. Circa 1965: The meter I learned the ZONE system with in the 1970s. Still have it, but it sits up on a shelf (2 batteries for it I believe not available anymore) with other equipment that evodes fond memories of the past.

S.E.I. Exposure Photometer: Love Hate relationship with this Photometer. Back in the 1980s was my main meter, but using it with the ZONE system involved many written calculations. I was amazed that I was able to take an exposure reading under a Thomas Duplex Super Safelight, and not even being at the minimal reading threshold. Today, I still have (was able to put one together from a collection of broken meters) one working S.E.I. Photometer, but I use it infrequently now.

Weston Master II and III Meters: Classics. They served me well but low light measurements left much to be desired.

Weston Master V meter: Definitely an improved meter over the previous version, but just never came to like its

Gossen Luna Pro: used one for years before replacing it with the more modern SBC. In my opinion just may be the classic merter just behind a Weston meter.

Gossen Luna-Pro SBC Light Meter: My standard light meter to refer to.

GOSSEN Ultra Pro Meter: Use it to test film/developer combinations. I have found it to be one of the more complicated and least easy meters to use. But that is unless you use it on a very regular basis.

Gossen Pilot exposure meter: Always keep one in the glove compartment. Actually twice saved me when once I forgot to pack a meter, and the other time when my meter's battery was dead.

Metrastar exposure meter: For whatever reason never felt comfortable with using this meter.

Pentax digital spot meter: Has been my current spot meter to use for the past years. Mine is Zone VI modified, but have not found the Zone VI modification to radically improve the meter's accuracy and performance.

Asahi Pentax Spot meter V Light Exposure Meter: Pre acquiring a digital version. Sometimes just prefer it to the digital version, because it just seems to be more user friendly, but use the digital version because of its smaller size.

Soligor spot meter: Switched to a Pentax spot meter, but the Soligor was indeed an excellent meter.
Horseman (Optical) Exposure meter 45: When I was doing a lot of Photomacrography and Photomicrography and shooting 4x5 Chromes using my Nikon Multiphot, this was the meter I used 90% of the time. After a while it readings were so accurate and consistent that I did away with bracketing (huge $ savings realized). When shooting objects that were difficult to meter with the Horseman use a:
Sinar Six: A super accurate meter when intelligently used. Took me a while to get used to using this meter. Finally ended up shooting (with brackets) some test images to acquaint myself with using this meter. Kept notes, and a lot of the times referring to them honed down on comfortably using this meter. About that time switched to shooting digital (per clients requests) and the Sinar Six has been boxed up and shelved since then.

And of course there were other meters used in my past including Minolta, Sekonic, and Spectra, but not used long enough to be able to comment on.

Alas I have owned and used way too many meters...

[6x6TLL]

How do you use the 5 degree spot? I ask because I have a 10 degree with my Minolta meter.

Hi Alan,

It attaches to the meter's head and has a viewfinder with a circle demarcating the 5 degree zone. Point and click, I use it as if it were a 1 degree meter, only that due to the larger angle of view I have to be more creative with finding my zone III and VII points. For B&W it works well, haven't shot many chromes yet, but so far they have been pretty spot on as well.

[grat]

Reading this thread raises the question is there any correlation between the reading on digital camera's in-built meter and the reading of a handheld meter?

When I bought my spot meter, I compared the metering with my EOS 90D set to "spot". For a straightforward scene, both reported the same values (well, the spot meter reported an EV and my DSLR came up with a shutter speed / aperture combination-- but it was valid for the EV the spot meter indicated).


An in-built meter in a digital camera is designed and calibrated for a digital image produced by that particular camera.
Whereas a handheld meter is designed for analogue images from any camera.

Or do both have to be compared on a 'grey card' or similar and the/a correction factor determined


Both should come up with an Exposure Value (EV), which may be automatically translated to a shutter speed + aperture. But both should be based on the lighting, and the "algorithm" of the meter-- the spot meter is obviously going to use a 1 degree spot sample, the camera may use a spot, center-weighted, partial or full matrix (evaluative-- these are all Canon terms) sampling-- but 1/125 @ f/16 should produce roughly the same exposure for ISO 100 film, or a digital camera set to ISO 100. How that happens is up to the manufacturer, but it is expected that both will produce roughly the same exposure index with the same settings.

[Alan Klein]

Hi Alan,

It attaches to the meter's head and has a viewfinder with a circle demarcating the 5 degree zone. Point and click, I use it as if it were a 1 degree meter, only that due to the larger angle of view I have to be more creative with finding my zone III and VII points. For B&W it works well, haven't shot many chromes yet, but so far they have been pretty spot on as well.

Thanks for that. I guess my questions is about which part of the scene do you aim it out since it's relatively wide compared to a 1 degree spot. I don't use the zone system. With my 10 degree, I try to pick a area that overlaps mid ranges or otherwise areas that are at different exposure -light and dark. Then use that as a average as the f stop setting. With medium format, I bracket +1 and -1. But now that I'm shooting 4x5, I stopped bracketing and have to be more accurate and consistent.

[6x6TLL]

Thanks for that. I guess my questions is about which part of the scene do you aim it out since it's relatively wide compared to a 1 degree spot. I don't use the zone system. With my 10 degree, I try to pick a area that overlaps mid ranges or otherwise areas that are at different exposure -light and dark. Then use that as a average as the f stop setting. With medium format, I bracket +1 and -1. But now that I'm shooting 4x5, I stopped bracketing and have to be more accurate and consistent.

As I said, sometimes I have to get creative to find a spot that fits in the 5 degree circle. Sometimes I have to extrapolate, find something closer or out of frame that's a similar value, or measure my hand and deduce the rest from that, but more often than not I manage to find a shadow and highlight value I can use with the meter. I'm mostly shooting landscapes, cityscapes, seascapes and portraits.

I don't follow the zone system as rigidly as many, but find it works well to provide a decent negative to work from. I might add a stop for a sunny desert scene or something darker where I want to make sure I have the shadow values retained, but I'm not as advanced as doing the whole complete pre-visualization thing from scene to final print. I sold my darkroom (DeVere 504 with color head) when I moved here to the US, so no more darkroom for me. At some point I'll have to get a scanner, for now I've been using a pro lab in Hollywood to make scans and prints when I'm happy enough with the results on the negative to make a print.

[Gabe]

Save up and buy a SPOT, flash, and Incident combo meter like the Sekonic L508, L558, L608, or L758 (used)

+1

You will never need anything else.