Reveni spot meter

[Ulophot]

Came across this today. A new spot meter, a number of different reviews on You Tube. Good price point for those who find its viewing-lensless design amenable. Good to see a new item in this field!

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mattbechberger/reveni-labs-spot-meter-tiny-spot-meter-for-your-film-camera?ref=nav_search&result=project&term=reveni+

[Dan Fromm]

Not that new. See https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/reveni-light-meter.173751/

[nbagno]

Not that new. See https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/reveni-light-meter.173751/

That's a different meter. This new one is a look through spot meter.

[Heroique]

Here's a closer look from a trusty film photographer who loves his Pentax digital:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIeya7SwXOU&t=304s

Hmm, for me, it's small enough to drop and lose in the leaves or ruin in a puddle of water.

[Ulophot]

But, Heroique, it's small weight and size perhaps make keeping it on a lanyard more attractive?

[Heroique]

Certainly one of its nice attractions.

But count on me dropping it/losing it within a year. ;^)

This is from someone whose orange tape around his Pentax digital has kept it from being left in the woods.

[Tin Can]

Agree, needs a sturdy lanyard with unbreakable ring and lens covers that will not get lost or cracked

Hunter orange is prefered

I now try to buy all gadgets in bright colors so I can find them

does it float?

[Alan9940]

FWIW, it comes with a case and lanyard. I backed it on Kickstarter and I'm looking forward to playing around with it. Personally, if I can shave even a few ounces off my 8x10 outfit when packing far afield, I'm definitely going to give it a go; not that my Pentax Digital Spot meter is all that "heavy." ;)

[neil poulsen]

Seems like it's a bit overpriced. :)

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

Seems like it's a bit overpriced. :)

This man lives in America, he has to pay taxes and wants to earn his living. Actually there are 120 000 human beings thinking he is not overpriced at all.

You can build such a light meter yourself, of course. You need an Arduino Nano, a battery, four switches, an OLED and an LDR. 20 USD. The first problem is the lens in front of the Arduino. The second problem is 3D printing. The third problem is programming. The fourth problem is evaluating. All of this can be solved, of course. Personally, I also enjoy doing something like this. But it takes time. If I have to choose between sitting at this project for 100 hours or photographing beautiful things with a Technika for 100 hours, then my decision has already been made. That's why I signed up on Kickstarter and support this project. When the light meter arrives, I will seal any openings waterproof. I will put orange tape on it. The light meter will be attached to my textile meter scale, to which the Linhof bellows loupe (without bellows) and the spirit level are also attached, and which I always hang around my neck. This will be a great thing. I hope you can access the microcontroller inside. Then maybe I'll program in the Gossen Profisix light balance ...

I could still bite myself in the ass today because I didn't buy the Pocket Spot back then!!! https://meteredlight.blogspot.com/2008/05/pocket-spot.html

[Tin Can]

I eagerly await the retail offering

I am done with KS

[Alan Klein]

How does Kickstarter work?

[Tin Can]

Not answering that Alan

I learned by expensive experience over many years


How does Kickstarter work?

[Ulophot]

Neil, I think Daniel's points are well-taken. While I have a Pentax V and got lucky at about $100 (plus the better part of another Franklin to get it fixed up and calibrated), One typically sees $300 and above for spotmeters that haven't been made for a very long time. I think we're fortunate to have someone filling the gap with a device that is getting great reviews from serious LF photographers and has updated features. If I were in the market for a spot meter, the price of this one would be quite attractive.

[Alan9940]

How does Kickstarter work?

Signup, and then back the project. You're charged the pledge amount on the day the campaign closes (March 10 for the Reveni Spot meter), if it's fully funded (reached its goal.) The Reveni Spot meter campaign hit its goal in a little over one hour! The major downside to backing a project on Kickstarter is that you're not promised anything. If, for whatever reason(s), the inventor/creator cannot deliver the product, then you're simply out the money. Personally, I've never had that happen. A minor downside is that these projects are rarely delivered on the scheduled stated in the campaign. Hiccups happen which delay the project.

With respect to Reveni Labs and Matt's new spot meter, I figure that he already has a successful product in his current light meter (which I own, btw) and this new spot meter is really nothing drastically new, for him, overall. Given the world situation, I suppose there could be some issues with certain parts and electronics, but I'm hoping for the best.

Unlike whatever Tin Can's experience has been, I have backed several projects on Kickstarter over the years and only one did I not get the product promised. I did get something for my pledge, just not what I was expecting. I won't mention a name because this group is still selling their product today.

[Doremus Scudder]

Certainly one of its nice attractions.

But count on me dropping it/losing it within a year. ;^)

This is from someone whose orange tape around his Pentax digital has kept it from being left in the woods.

Heroique,

My Pentax spot meters are on lanyards that tie to a tab on my vest (about shirt pocket height) or something similar, like a button, or even around my neck. The meter lives in a pocket, but the lanyard is short enough that the meter won't hit the ground if dropped (unless I'm kneeling...). The lanyard has saved my meter more than once...

Best,

Doremus

[Ulophot]

I use a long lanyard somewhat like Doremus's -- same length principle -- but it goes over my head to the opposite shoulder. The meter attaches to a belt clip.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I don't want to use something that uses someone's system of exposure. And if I did use that guy's system, I'd always be paranoid of losing it. It's pretty tiny.

[Alan9940]

I don't want to use something that uses someone's system of exposure. And if I did use that guy's system, I'd always be paranoid of losing it. It's pretty tiny.

You don't have to use Nick's P.M.M. metering system. It also does averaging readings or you could use it as a plain 'ole spot meter. I read in the Kickstarter comments that Matt is looking into implementing some sort of "zone system approach" too. Folks have offered many suggestions in the comments; I just hope it doesn't become overly complicated.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

You don't have to use Nick's P.M.M. metering system. It also does averaging readings or you could use it as a plain 'ole spot meter. I read in the Kickstarter comments that Matt is looking into implementing some sort of "zone system approach" too. Folks have offered many suggestions in the comments; I just hope it doesn't become overly complicated.

I think the P.M.M of Nick Carver is made up of a lot of hot air, so he can promote it as a video. When I look at the P.M.M. mode of the Reveni, it seems that the shadows are measured first, then the highlights. Then an average value is formed. Apparently you can define the target zone for shadows and highlights beforehand, e.g. -2 EV for zone III and +2 EV for zone VII. The computer then asks for the shadows and positions the measured value in zone III if -2 EV was defined beforehand. Then it asks for the highlights, and so on.

- Even though I signed up for the project, there is one serious point of concern: the ISO range: "1, 3, 6, 12, 25, 50, 80, 100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800" Because the FP4+ developed 7'00'' in HC110H 1+63 at 20°C reaches density 0.12 in Zone I with an exposure of ISO 32. ISO 32 is not in the ISO range. In the lower ISO range only half steps are listed. Why? Isn't the goal of a spot meter to be accurate in thirds? I would URGENTLY ask the inventor to divide the ISO range into thirds.

[Alan9940]

- Even though I signed up for the project, there is one serious point of concern: the ISO range: "1, 3, 6, 12, 25, 50, 80, 100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800" Because the FP4+ developed 7'00'' in HC110H 1+63 at 20°C reaches density 0.12 in Zone I with an exposure of ISO 32. ISO 32 is not in the ISO range. In the lower ISO range only half steps are listed. Why? Isn't the goal of a spot meter to be accurate in thirds? I would URGENTLY ask the inventor to divide the ISO range into thirds.

Intermediate ISO's can easily be derived by +/- exposure compensation. For your EI 32 FP4+ example, set the ISO on the meter to 25, then dial in -0.03 exposure compensation.

[Heroique]

Heroique, My Pentax spot meters are on lanyards that tie to a tab on my vest (about shirt pocket height) or something similar, like a button, or even around my neck. The meter lives in a pocket, but the lanyard is short enough that the meter won't hit the ground if dropped (unless I'm kneeling...). The lanyard has saved my meter more than once...Best, Doremus

That sounds like a smart method to keep a Pentax close and protect it from dropping.

Me, I like to keep accessories on a nearby “pocket” pancho and not be distracted by weighty pockets or swinging items. Yet a lanyard with the tiny Reveni might work really well.


I don't want to use something that uses someone's system of exposure. And if I did use that guy's system, I'd always be paranoid of losing it. It's pretty tiny.

I believe the Reveni’s P.M.M. mode (by Nick Carver) is used in conjunction with one’s own personal meter tests. That is, it’s a customizeable mode. The Reveni can be switched to traditional modes, too.

Like you, I keep coming back to its tininess. In the Nick Carver video which I linked in post #4, when he pulls it out of his sweatshirt pocket, I keep waiting for him to fumble and drop it on his hardwood floor. He should have mentioned the lanyard it comes with.

Overall I think the Reveni looks like a promising product if your field habits harmonize with it.

[Ulophot]

Perhaps you intended 0.3, or am I missing something?

[Heroique]

There is a potential design flaw which Nick Carver briefly addresses but should have explained in greater depth.

Namely, parallax:

For one does not see the subject directly through the Reveni. It’s a black screen with a digital read out. One needs to keep the other (uncovered) eye open to see the subject. That way, the read-out and subject superimpose on each other. However, this naturally introduces the problem of parallax. What the Reveni sees (especially in a tiny spot area) is potentially different than what your uncovered eye sees.

Nick Carver offers a good example: what happens if you’re pointing the meter toward the sky but using your "seeing" eye to look at your subject straight ahead? He only says intuition mitigates this problem, but doesn’t go further. I wish he had.

[Michael R]

Intermediate ISO's can easily be derived by +/- exposure compensation. For your EI 32 FP4+ example, set the ISO on the meter to 25, then dial in -0.03 exposure compensation.

Easy enough. I'd also add that flare introduces enough slop so that evaluating things in increments of 1/3 stops is really false precision anyway. If I had an EI of 32 for a B&W negative film, and a meter that only had 25 and 50, I'd simply use 25.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

I am totally excited about a tiny spot meter, and am supporting the kick starter. I love my Pentax spot, but it is too big to carry with me traveling (if I ever travel again...).

That said, there seems to be a whole host of problems with the meter. None are irredeemable, but I can see that they will be annoying in use. The limited ISO settings is one (fixable by +/- exposure compensation, as pointed above), the other is the "whole stop" aperture settings. It only shows full apertures (f5.6, 8, 11, 16, et cetera) and speeds (1, 2, 4, 8, et cetera) with a "remainder" setting below, so f6.3 (AKA 5.6 1/3) might show as f5.6 R+.3 and 1/50 (on an older Compur shutter) or 1/48 (24fps on some 16mm cameras) might show as 1/60 R-.3. I can likely work with this, but it will be annoying. Hopefully this is something that would be fixed in the future.

[f9likethekey]

I think the P.M.M of Nick Carver is made up of a lot of hot air, so he can promote it as a video.

I had been using the zone system for about 6 years and was a skeptic about Nick's class. However I'll admit that his method works better for me (maybe not everyone), and has dramatically increased my metering ability and exposure accuracy.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

I had been using the zone system for about 6 years and was a skeptic about Nick's class. However I'll admit that his method works better for me (maybe not everyone), and has dramatically increased my metering ability and exposure accuracy.


Can you explain the P.M.M, please.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

Intermediate ISO's can easily be derived by +/- exposure compensation. For your EI 32 FP4+ example, set the ISO on the meter to 25, then dial in -0.03 exposure compensation.

Imagine you buy something on the Internet. There you have a form. For the date of birth you have to select the days 1-31. But not all days are listed. Only "1-2-3-4-7-9-10-11-15-18-22-23-24-25-31". Like this. Perhaps the PHP machine at the other end of your connection is supersticious and doesn't like 27. So, because you were born on the 27th, you enter 31 and in an extra field you write "-4". Month: "September -3". Imagine calculating effective ISO, bellows factor and N+1 in the field ... What should be easy or intuitive or sensible about such a derivation? It is no problem at all to write a clean ISO series in thirds into a table or an array of the controller program. If you program a form in the above style, you will have to reorient yourself at some point.

[Alan9940]

I'm currently using Matt's teeny "sugar cube" meter with my MF folders and the whole stop readout isn't an issue for me. When I take a reading I watch the EV value displayed just prior to the measurement which tells me if the meter rounded up or down. If I know it rounded up, based on the EV readout, then I know that if I use the shutter/aperture shown I'll effectively be under-exposing my image slightly. Therefore, I'll tweak the aperture to compensate. Conversely, if it rounded down, then I go the other way. Working this way is close enough for B&W or color neg film, but probably not precise enough for transparency film. Since I shoot primarily B&W, it works great for me.

[f9likethekey]

Can you explain the P.M.M, please.

It uses his technique to precicely place values where you want them, vs where they fall on the zone system. A typed explination beyond that wouldn't do his online class justice and would cause more confusion honestly. I was a skeptic and fully prepared to ask for my money back when i purchased his metering course, but I really believe that particular course was worth the money. I can't speak for his other classes.

[eepskamp]

I have never used a stand-alone spot meter and am looking forward to adding this to my "tool kit". I own the Reveni and have found it consistent with other meters. I am confident in the developer's work and believe that this will be a great product as well.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

I'm currently using Matt's teeny "sugar cube" meter with my MF folders and the whole stop readout isn't an issue for me. When I take a reading I watch the EV value displayed just prior to the measurement which tells me if the meter rounded up or down. If I know it rounded up, based on the EV readout, then I know that if I use the shutter/aperture shown I'll effectively be under-exposing my image slightly. Therefore, I'll tweak the aperture to compensate. Conversely, if it rounded down, then I go the other way. Working this way is close enough for B&W or color neg film, but probably not precise enough for transparency film. Since I shoot primarily B&W, it works great for me.

(But the basic idea is that technology serves people, not the other way around, right? - What is the problem with writing a complete ISO scale into the software? This will take a minute.)

UPDATE: the inventor writes on Kickstarter that he would implement the ISO scale in thirds. This is very good news! I think it's very nice that the users can get involved in the process and express their needs. This will be a useful product, I think. I would recommend you: check it out, maybe you have some ideas, share them with the inventor.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

It uses his technique to precicely place values where you want them, vs where they fall on the zone system. A typed explination beyond that wouldn't do his online class justice and would cause more confusion honestly. I was a skeptic and fully prepared to ask for my money back when i purchased his metering course, but I really believe that particular course was worth the money. I can't speak for his other classes.

Sorry, but this sounds like Umberto Eco to me, unlimited semiosis, hermeticism, the pendulum of Foucault. In the zone system, you place the values, too, to prevent them from falling. Perhaps you place structured shadows in III, Caucasian skin types in VI, and when the highlights fall in IX, you place them in VIII through N-1 development. Is P.M.M really more intuitive? I just don't understand the P.M.M. - Is there any free documentation?

[Alan9940]

(But the basic idea is that technology serves people, not the other way around, right?

In a perfect world, yes! My iPhone, for example, does things that drives me absolutely bonkers and I'm left wondering why (after having been a software developer most of my adult life) it was designed that way. And, it's not just technology! But, I'm not going down this rabbit hole. It sounds like Matt's meters are not for you. Fair enough. Buy something that works for you.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

In a perfect world, yes! My iPhone, for example, does things that drives me absolutely bonkers and I'm left wondering why (after having been a software developer most of my adult life) it was designed that way. And, it's not just technology! But, I'm not going down this rabbit hole. It sounds like Matt's meters are not for you. Fair enough. Buy something that works for you.

Surely not. Of course, this wonderful device is extraordinarily interesting. I was looking for such a thing for years.

Especially if you were a software developer, you will know that a full ISO scale is no problem at all. It's just a matter of writing some numbers into the source code. Which is what Matt is doing now. Children are learning this at school right now, with an Arduino. Where is the problem?

My question about how exactly P.M.M. works, on the other hand, was not answered yet. Is it a trade secret? Where is the problem to explain something in five sentences so that others can understand it? Why shouldn't Matt's exposure meter be for me just because you don't explain P.M.M. to me?

[John Layton]

hmmm...might consider this if it could be mounted onto the hotshoes of my Fuji/Voigtlander 667's. Actually, given the small size and light weight...a shoe mount should be an option I think, applicable for doing hand held work with RF's, and/or "point and shoot" LF's.

[f9likethekey]

Sorry, but this sounds like Umberto Eco to me, unlimited semiosis, hermeticism, the pendulum of Foucault. In the zone system, you place the values, too, to prevent them from falling. Perhaps you place structured shadows in III, Caucasian skin types in VI, and when the highlights fall in IX, you place them in VIII through N-1 development. Is P.M.M really more intuitive? I just don't understand the P.M.M. - Is there any free documentation?

Free documentation, not that I'm aware of. If your metering technique works well for you then I wouldn't bother changing it around. The zone system and I had a rocky relationship so I was in search of something I could work with easier.

I'll also add, that I'm not trying to be obtuse, but it really comes down to picking your values and placing them. It doesn't deal with shadows or zones or any of that, you pick a metering spot and value it on a scale. I found it was more intiutive (for me) than working with zones. It is not drastically different from zones, just a better (again, for me) way of wraping my head around metering light. I also don't have any association with Nick Carver other than being a happy customer.

[Alan9940]

My question about how exactly P.M.M. works, on the other hand, was not answered yet. Is it a trade secret? Where is the problem to explain something in five sentences so that others can understand it? Why shouldn't Matt's exposure meter be for me just because you don't explain P.M.M. to me?

It's my understanding that the new spot meter manual will have enough of an explanation of P.M.M. that you'll be able to use it, if so desired. I doubt that you'd find anyone willing to reveal full details of P.M.M. out of respect for Nick's hard work putting together his course. If you need to understand P.M.M. before investing in Matt's meter, then wait for production units to get into the hands of other photographers and I'm sure someone will comment about it. Or...you could buy Nick's course.

[f9likethekey]

I doubt that you'd find anyone willing to reveal full details of P.M.M. out of respect for Nick's hard work putting together his course. If you need to understand P.M.M. before investing in Matt's meter, then wait for production units to get into the hands of other photographers and I'm sure someone will comment about it. Or...you could buy Nick's course.

+100

[Heroique]

+100

+101

The link in post #4 to Nick Carver’s assessment of the Reveni addresses the basics of his P.M.M. and explains how one ultimately tailors it to their own film tests and other personal preferences.

One feature of the Reveni’s P.M.M. mode is setting desired dynamic limits for any particular shot to help the meter suggest an exposure. He even shows what data the Reveni displays while in this mode; watch closely, and you can make many inferences about the possible usefulness of P.M.M. to your work.

I haven’t purchased his course, but from what I can tell from his excellent videos is that his P.M.M is of course derived from AA’s zone system and might be easier or more intuitive for some photographers to make exposure choices.

[GRAYnomad]

I don't know why metering has to be so complicated. For negative film you measure the darkest part of the scene and set the exposure at that - 2 stops (place it in Zone 3), then measure the lightest part of the scene. You are usually done at that point.

If the difference is < or > the range of your film you may want to pull/push the dev.

I don't see the need for "averaging" and PMM and whatever and I hate meters that display in apertures and/or shutter speeds. I just want an EV for starters because I can do the range math without having to think.

So regardless of any new meter I'll be sticking with the Pentax, it doesn't need to be turned on or off and it just does what you need and nothing more.

That said this could easily be done with a firmware option as well in the Reveni. Maybe there's a chance we can have a simple version.

[f9likethekey]

I don't know why metering has to be so complicated. For negative film you measure the darkest part of the scene and set the exposure at that - 2 stops (place it in Zone 3), then measure the lightest part of the scene. You are usually done at that point.


This is exactly why I sought out other methods of metering.

With the zone system I kept trying to keep all the detail in both highlights and shadows (that's why it was designed in the first place). PMM has helped me take exposure for how I want to print them, not just gathering information.

[GRAYnomad]

Unlike Ansel Adams (pre-visualization) I always ignored how it was going to be printed. My goal in the field was to capture every bit of information I could, once captured I can decide what to do with it at my leisure in the darkroom.

[f9likethekey]

When I shot the zone system I also tried to capture the most information and then print how I wanted it to look. I had some easy successes, but most of the time the prints I wanted took a lot longer to get right than I really wanted them to. More often than not I had to use split grade printing, which isn't nessassarily a bad thing, but if the negative had been more like my 'pre-visualization' I could've used a single grade filter (and saved myself an hour or 2 dialing in the exposure).

When it all boils down it's what works for you best. I was hesitant to spend the money on Nicks course, but I'm glad I did because I found a metering method that works for me. (It apparently works for others too if they're incorporating it into this light meter.) As long as you're happy with your prints, who I am to argue.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

I was hesitant to spend the money on Nicks course, but I'm glad I did because I found a metering method that works for me. (It apparently works for others too if they're incorporating it into this light meter.)

After studying Philosophy, focus on Philosophy of Science, Aristotelianism and Phenomenological Science of Art, I would classify your statements, loosely according to Wittgenstein, Husserl and Popper, as "without sense". Because I can't see any reference points for how your PMM method is supposed to work. You say you think PMM is the super great method, but these assertions lack sensual as well as categorical "Anschauung", intuition, because you don't explain how exactly it works. It's the same with cults who believe in something but don't know why, and who don't want to explain anything either, perhaps because they're afraid that it's actually contradictory or trivial. Experience tells me that such teachings, which one finds great, but which one cannot or does not want to explain, are usually rather trivial or banal. Especially when you have to pay for it. Please forgive me if I assume the same here. Convince me of the opposite, please.

[Tin Can]

groked




After studying Philosophy, focus on Philosophy of Science, Aristotelianism and Phenomenological Science of Art, I would classify your statements, loosely according to Wittgenstein, Husserl and Popper, as "without sense". Because I can't see any reference points for how your PMM method is supposed to work. You say you think PMM is the super great method, but these assertions lack sensual as well as categorical "Anschauung", intuition, because you don't explain how exactly it works. It's the same with cults who believe in something but don't know why, and who don't want to explain anything either, perhaps because they're afraid that it's actually contradictory or trivial. Experience tells me that such teachings, which one finds great, but which one cannot or does not want to explain, are usually rather trivial or banal. Especially when you have to pay for it. Please forgive me if I assume the same here. Convince me of the opposite, please.

[ic-racer]

Philosopher’s Photography Contest (https://youtu.be/LfduUFF_i1A)

After hours of dispute over who shows first, Archimedes presents the first photograph.

Leibinez, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Epictetus, Aristotle and Socrates meander in deep thought, pacing in front of the print.

After hours of contemplation, no other prints are shown, Archimedes is declared the winner.

In dispute, Hegel calls out that the reality of the photograph is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic aesthetics.
Kant, via the categorical imperative holds that ontologically the image exists only in the imagination.
Marks declares the image is ‘out of focus’ and discounts it entirely.

[f9likethekey]

Convince me of the opposite, please.

No thank you.

If your metering method works, then keep using it. As I said in previous posts, PMM may not be for everyone. Also, I managed to try and convey my preference without informing the world of my philosophical qualifications.

[John Layton]

...or getting too emulsional! :rolleyes:

[Heroique]

Marks declares the image is ‘out of focus’ and discounts it entirely.

Who is “Marks” and why does he make his only appearance in the final sentence?

(David Woolf Marks? Karl Marx?)

Was he another philosopher, a bystander, a friend of Archimedes? What was his role? What did he know, and when did he know it? :D

[ic-racer]

Who is “Marks” and why does he make his only appearance in the final sentence?

(David Woolf Marks? Karl Marx?)

Was he another philosopher, a bystander, a friend of Archimedes? What was his role? What did he know, and when did he know it? :D

Marks is the father of 'correct as you type' spell check reasoning. Without him weed bee un-a ball to commune a cake on the internet...

[Heroique]

Marks is the father of 'correct as you type' spell check reasoning. Without him weed bee un-a ball to commune a cake on the internet...

Thanks for the follow-up remarx! ;^)

[ic-racer]

I do, by the way, have a Revini meter. I use it on my Horseman.

212778

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

No thank you.

If your metering method works, then keep using it. As I said in previous posts, PMM may not be for everyone. Also, I managed to try and convey my preference without informing the world of my philosophical qualifications.

Do you know the snapshot method (Peter Fischer-Piel)? This is really the easiest method to expose film with a zone system ...

[John Layton]

Ic-racer...I see that your Reveni meter features a hotshoe mount (which is what I'd want for my MF/RF's) - but the meter itself looks different than that featured in the KS promo. Is that an earlier model?

[MAubrey]

Matt Marrash's video about the meter has a brief discussion of Nick Carver's metering method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBlacFq74JA

[Alan9940]

Ic-racer...I see that your Reveni meter features a hotshoe mount (which is what I'd want for my MF/RF's) - but the meter itself looks different than that featured in the KS promo. Is that an earlier model?

Not ic-racer, but... That is Matt's first meter, whereas the current Kickstarter campaign his for his new spot meter. The little "sugar cube" meter is a reflective type meter that reads about a 30 degree angle. I use it on my MF folders and have found it to be quite accurate.

[Alan Klein]

Matt Marrash's video about the meter has a brief discussion of Nick Carver's metering method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBlacFq74JA

Can you sum up his comments so we don't have to watch the whole thing?

[Tobias Key]

Can you sum up his comments so we don't have to watch the whole thing?

As far as I could discern it is an adapted zone system where you can set the contrast range of the film in the meter. So you could for example set your meter to five stops of contrast for transparency film. Then it looks like you take a reading and set a value to it. However those values are described as something like 'white with texture' or 'somewhat dark' rather than as numbered zones and you can see the descriptions in meter. So from that point of view it is more logical because you can match what you are metering to the description below it in the meter by scrolling through the options. There s no option to calculate expansion or contraction or anything like that. Looks like it would work well with colour film but it isn't exactly an earth shattering breakthrough, it's just swapping numbered zones for described zones.

[Alan Klein]

As far as I could discern it is an adapted zone system where you can set the contrast range of the film in the meter. So you could for example set your meter to five stops of contrast for transparency film. Then it looks like you take a reading and set a value to it. However those values are described as something like 'white with texture' or 'somewhat dark' rather than as numbered zones and you can see the descriptions in meter. So from that point of view it is more logical because you can match what you are metering to the description below it in the meter by scrolling through the options. There s no option to calculate expansion or contraction or anything like that. Looks like it would work well with colour film but it isn't exactly an earth shattering breakthrough, it's just swapping numbered zones for described zones.

Thanks for the summation. I think I'll watch it. There may be something in there I could use and adapt to my metering.

[roscoetuff-Skip Mersereau]

I think the toughest part of this is knowing how your eye will respond to the overlay.. and will it work for you, for me or whoever. I'd assume the rest of the process and mechanics are sound. It's just the question of a spot meter where you don't know exactly what you've focused on. Guess if I were a fighter pilot, I'd be used to that sort of overlay and have confidence in it. As it stands, I think I'd have to try it to see.

Separately, I've read about many different "systems" for exposure, and I've seldom seen any other than the Zone System get widespread traction. Whether Nick Carver's method is "new" or just a program for teaching the application of THE Zone system or something like it (the Videc system on the LFP home page here?), doesn't matter all that much to me. I try to be a student and ALWAYS stay curious 'cause you never know where you'll pick up good ideas to make life better.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

As far as I could discern it is an adapted zone system where you can set the contrast range of the film in the meter. So you could for example set your meter to five stops of contrast for transparency film. Then it looks like you take a reading and set a value to it. However those values are described as something like 'white with texture' or 'somewhat dark' rather than as numbered zones and you can see the descriptions in meter. So from that point of view it is more logical because you can match what you are metering to the description below it in the meter by scrolling through the options. There s no option to calculate expansion or contraction or anything like that. Looks like it would work well with colour film but it isn't exactly an earth shattering breakthrough, it's just swapping numbered zones for described zones.

I don't mean to tease, but that's how far I've come. But if the light meter asks for "somewhat dark" or "white with texture'", and if that is supposed to simplify the exposure of color film, then I wonder where "yellow with violet stripes" is, or "olive green" and "dark red". Because PMM would then mean that you have to understand the color image as a black and white image before you expose it. This is rather unintuitive for me. I would rather use an incident light measurement with the dome pointing upwards. -- Anyway, I'm looking forward to trying out this device. I'm also looking forward to the ISO scale being adjusted.

[Tobias Key]

I don't mean to tease, but that's how far I've come. But if the light meter asks for "somewhat dark" or "white with texture'", and if that is supposed to simplify the exposure of color film, then I wonder where "yellow with violet stripes" is, or "olive green" and "dark red". Because PMM would then mean that you have to understand the color image as a black and white image before you expose it. This is rather unintuitive for me. I would rather use an incident light measurement with the dome pointing upwards. -- Anyway, I'm looking forward to trying out this device. I'm also looking forward to the ISO scale being adjusted.

Not my system and not one I'd use. Colour negative is good enough and flexible enough that metering doesn't have to be so complicated. I suspect as well you're going to run into complications trying to meter through grads or other filters with the Reveni - the hand you hold the filter with will at least partially obscure the vision in your free eye.

[Jim Noel]

"The more complicated your metering process gets, the fewer images you will make."
This from one of the great teachers of the 20th Century, Al Weber.

[nbagno]

I don't mean to tease, but that's how far I've come. But if the light meter asks for "somewhat dark" or "white with texture'", and if that is supposed to simplify the exposure of color film, then I wonder where "yellow with violet stripes" is, or "olive green" and "dark red". Because PMM would then mean that you have to understand the color image as a black and white image before you expose it. This is rather unintuitive for me. I would rather use an incident light measurement with the dome pointing upwards. -- Anyway, I'm looking forward to trying out this device. I'm also looking forward to the ISO scale being adjusted.

With PMM you measure with reference to middle gray. So the question you would ask is not what color it is, but where does Yellow with stripes land as referenced to middle gray? Is it +1 ev? -1 ev? +3? If you can’t figure it out, meter something else in the scene. The next step is to place that measurement on the meter. With this new meter, putting it in the meter is done for you. It’s a very easy system to use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tin Can]

I am very glad I shot the same Pentax and standard lens with no meter for 40 years

Yes I do use a Sekonic L 758 now

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

With PMM you measure with reference to middle gray. So the question you would ask is not what color it is, but where does Yellow with stripes land as referenced to middle gray? Is it +1 ev? -1 ev? +3? If you can’t figure it out, meter something else in the scene. The next step is to place that measurement on the meter. With this new meter, putting it in the meter is done for you. It’s a very easy system to use.

Of course, and that is not in question. - The question for me was only why they verbalize -1 EV or -2 EV as "somewhat dark", nothing more. The way you present it reminds me of the Gossen Profisix / LunaPro with its light balance of -3 1/3 EV to +3 1/3 EV. A brilliant device, especially with the 1° spot attachment, light weight but bulky. The Sekonic L-758 also has this, but with the possibility to define the limits of the printable area yourself, e.g. for N-1, N and N+1. A very useful feature. Too bad that the new Sekonic L-858 is so complicated. You always have to call up a menu to measure the contrast or clear the memory.

[Heroique]

…Too bad that the new Sekonic L-858 is so complicated. You always have to call up a menu to measure the contrast or clear the memory.

A principal reason why Nick Carver advocates the Reveni (and the two main Pentax models) over all Sekonic spot meters.

Nick, tell us how you really feel (from the video link in post #4):


“Both the Pentax Digital and the Pentax Spot Meter V are far superior, in my opinion, to the Sekonic spot meters, whether it's an older model or one of the brand new ones with a big fancy screen. The Sekonic spot meters, as accurate as they are, are so freaking bloated with features and functions and menus and buttons and a bunch of stuff that just gets in the way of what is a very simple and clean and effective [P.M.M.] metering process, the one I cover in my course.”

He goes on to say that since the “fantastic” Pentax models are discontinued, getting older, growing more expensive on the used market, and becoming more likely to break down, photographers may think the Reveni is coming to the rescue on many levels.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

A principal reason why Nick Carver advocates the Reveni (and the two main Pentax models) over all Sekonic spot meters.

Nick, tell us how you really feel (from the video link in post #4):


“Both the Pentax Digital and the Pentax Spot Meter V are far superior, in my opinion, to the Sekonic spot meters, whether it's an older model or one of the brand new ones with a big fancy screen. The Sekonic spot meters, as accurate as they are, are so freaking bloated with features and functions and menus and buttons and a bunch of stuff that just gets in the way of what is a very simple and clean and effective [P.M.M.] metering process, the one I cover in my course.”

He goes on to say that since the “fantastic” Pentax models are discontinued, getting older, growing more expensive on the used market, and becoming more likely to break down, photographers may think the Reveni is coming to the rescue on many levels.

Well, the other day I bought two second hand Pentax Honeywell Spot Meters, because I like to solder and rebuild old things - Sorry, but I have never come across anything more unergonomic. They run on two different batteries (mercury button cell and 9V block), have two different meters for light and dark, with a shock sensitive pointer instrument, a scale whose values like "11 1/3, 12 2/3 and 14" you have to cache in your brain to transfer them to a calculator disk that has no zone system scale ... You copy it from the manual and stick it over the cine scale ... With the Sekonic, whether L-408 or L-558, I measure the shadows, press the Memory button, then measure the highlights, count the EV steps on the graphical scale, and decide which average to take and how to develop. When I am lazy, I take the dedicated "Average" button. That's what I call intuitive. Even the question of what a medium gray should be is obsolete for me, because it's all about contrast, which belongs in the printable range of tonal values. Of course, you have to pick the right mode for it. It has a dedicated "Mode" button for that. If you do not change this, you always measure in the same way.

[f9likethekey]

Well, the other day I bought two second hand Pentax Honeywell Spot Meters, because I like to solder and rebuild old things - Sorry, but I have never come across anything more unergonomic. They run on two different batteries (mercury button cell and 9V block), have two different meters for light and dark, with a shock sensitive pointer instrument, a scale whose values like "11 1/3, 12 2/3 and 14" you have to cache in your brain to transfer them to a calculator disk that has no zone system scale ... You copy it from the manual and stick it over the cine scale ... With the Sekonic, whether L-408 or L-558, I measure the shadows, press the Memory button, then measure the highlights, count the EV steps on the graphical scale, and decide which average to take and how to develop. When I am lazy, I take the dedicated "Average" button. That's what I call intuitive. Even the question of what a medium gray should be is obsolete for me, because it's all about contrast, which belongs in the printable range of tonal values. Of course, you have to pick the right mode for it. It has a dedicated "Mode" button for that. If you do not change this, you always measure in the same way.

From all your coments on this thread, it appears you're quite happy with everything that is YOUR way and have only supplied reasons to not explore this spot meter or PMM. Thanks for being a troll.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

From all your coments on this thread, it appears you're quite happy with everything that is YOUR way and have only supplied reasons to not explore this spot meter or PMM. Thanks for being a troll.

Nonsense. I just wanted to know from you what PMM is, and you didn't want to explain it to me, for whatever reason. Anyway, you are annoyed by me instead of just explaining it to me. This is how I should behave with my children. They would kick me in the rear end. We'll find out when the light meter comes. Perhaps PMM is a useful method ... (Otherwise, I always thought a forum was for discussing stuff. I am always happy when someone explains to me how he does something with his equipment.)

[nbagno]

Nonsense. I just wanted to know from you what PMM is, and you didn't want to explain it to me, for whatever reason. Anyway, you are annoyed by me instead of just explaining it to me. This is how I should behave with my children. They would kick me in the rear end. We'll find out when the light meter comes. Perhaps PMM is a useful method ... (Otherwise, I always thought a forum was for discussing stuff. I am always happy when someone explains to me how he does something with his equipment.)

You pick a tone. You decide where that tone should be compared to a neutral tone and decide if it's +4 stops over gray, - 4 under gray, or +/- 3 if using reversal film. If you feel that tone should be a very light tone, then you might say that the tone is a+3. Whichever way you want that tone to come out in your picture will guide you to where on the +/- scale it should land. You take that EV reading for the tone you picked and place the EV marking on the Pentax scale to align to a custom sticker that you place on your Pentax. That gives you your shutter and aperture speed. You can if you wish meter other tones in the scene to make sure it all aligns. This new meter will do away with the customer scale sticker, and of course, be a much smaller device. Nick's course, which I bought, is very good, and very in-depth not just for PMM, but other topics related to metering. It's easy to understand and quick in practice. I think it's imperative that the younger generation innovate where ever possible to keep film alive. This meter is just one of the many innovations that continue to flow out of the younger creative minds. Very exciting for the future of film.

[Tin Can]

A fool and money soon part

i have never seen 'troll' acusationion used here

I am shocked, I tell you!

Get a grip






From all your coments on this thread, it appears you're quite happy with everything that is YOUR way and have only supplied reasons to not explore this spot meter or PMM. Thanks for being a troll.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

A fool and money soon part

A 300$ tutorial: why not?

What is described here as PMM can actually be well integrated into a combination of two different (!) zone systems, if I understand correctly. Perhaps PMM is just a combination of these old methods that have been around for at least 50 years.

First, there is a tonal control by placing the reading in a particular zone. I still find this to be a serious exposure control. What is white remains white, what is black remains black. Don't be afraid of II and VIII. Anyway, many color negative films reduce contrast. Black and white films can be developed to reduce contrast. With color slide films, contrast is probably higher. An incident light meter does not know neither II nor VIII ... If that is PMM, then the only difference from incident light metering is that you are willfully overexposing or underexposing.

Of course, if you scan film, do you have to rely on the printable tonal range?

Secondly, tonal control is achieved with the help of development. In the classical zone system, this is done with unidirectional contrast control, in which structured darkness is regarded as III. White, Zakia and Lorenz in "The New Zone System Manual", page 82-87, have proposed a bidirectional contrast control, which not only flattens the highlights, but also raises the shadows, so that middle gray in V always has the same density, wether you're pushing or pulling the film. For example N+1 for exposure, N-1 for development. Or N-1 for exposure, N+1 for development.

In the first case "the print value interval for middle zone exposures begins to widen. Maximum separation in print values between adjacent subject brightnesses is achieved. More exposure and less development produces the opposite result. Adjacent subject brightnesses are rendered with less separation in tone." White, Zakia, Lorenz: The New Zone System Manual. 1976, page 86.

The exposure adjustment is stronger than in Adams. Ansel Adams says with N-1 development we need a 2/3 brighter aperture. White, Zakia, Lorenz say that it has to be a whole f-stop, and for N-2 development even 2 whole f-stops. This increases the density in the lower zones enormously.

Peter Fischer-Piel, who had tested this method in more detail and published it in the German speaking zone system community, calls this bidirectional contrast control "snapshot method". We simply set N+1 on the camera, i.e. half the effective ISO, for example ISO 16 as N+1, instead of effective ISO 32 for a Ilford FP4+ with nominal ISO 125, and develop so that we achieve N-1 compaction. Result: "maximum separation in print values", compression of II and VIII into the printable range, and that with a 35 mm camera, with 135 film ...

Of course, with PMM you can choose where to place the gray of the spot meter. And if it really becomes too contrasty: that's just the way the world is that we photograph. But conditio sine qua non is to know whether the film works with high-contrast or soft, and that you know how to treat it to preset a certain look.

[nbagno]

New features now include a zone mode:

Zone Metering Mode

While Nick Carver's Precision Metering Method is a fantastic zone-style system, lots of people have asked for the traditional Zone system to be available. Many photographers have spent years (or decades) using the Zone system with their other meters and now "think in Zones" as it were, and so they would like to keep working this way. I totally understand the desire and so I'm adding a 4th mode, a Zone mode. The operation is simple; sample a tone in the scene, assign a zone to it with the arrow buttons, and the meter will give your middle grey settings. Use the compare function to check the rest of your scene and the meter will read back the Zones for those areas.

[John Layton]

Given this very sensible additional feature...I'll be giving this meter a much closer look!

[Alan9940]

I've already backed this project, but I was glad to read in this morning's project update e-mail about all the practical changes Matt is already making for the final production unit. He sure seems to listen to his customers!

[esearing]

Wonder how well it works in dim light. Morning in the forrest can get down to 2 - 4 EVs and you are reading a black background while viewing a dark wet rock or shadowed tree bark . I do not think the two eye method would work for me as my eyes would tend to zoom in and out of the scene or scan the periphery.

[Andrew O'Neill]

It seems to be doing very well on KS. Almost at a quarter million $$, and he only wanted 28K! What do KS people do when they have a ton of money leftover?

[Rick L]

get rich

[Chauncey Walden]

Go into mass production and continuously make improvements.

[MAubrey]

It seems to be doing very well on KS. Almost at a quarter million $$, and he only wanted 28K! What do KS people do when they have a ton of money leftover?

Sometimes they get overwhelmed by the new challenges created by production at a larger scale than they anticipated and the release gets delayed for a year.

[choiliefan]

It seems to be doing very well on KS. Almost at a quarter million $$, and he only wanted 28K! What do KS people do when they have a ton of money leftover?

Make it more attractive?
If not that, add a few holes and give it an ocarina function.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Following up on this thread. I received my Reveni spot meter about a month ago, and after some comparisons and tweaking used it (successfully) yesterday. I am not going to review it, but found that it worked as expected with very similar readings as my 35 year old Pentax spotmeter. Many of the shortcomings identified above were removed during development.

[Kiwi7475]

I just wish they hadn’t removed the rounding reminder in the latest sw version. It’s effectively a whole stop only meter, or else I need to mentally compute things if I set it to 1/3’s stops, which I really don’t want to do during a sunset when things are rapidly changing.

So I’m back to my trusty Sekonic.

[Xiggy]

It's in Canadian dollars! Not as if it were real money!

[bmikiten]

Based on what? Are there other options like this we are missing?

Brian

[Alan Klein]

I just wish they hadn’t removed the rounding reminder in the latest sw version. It’s effectively a whole stop only meter, or else I need to mentally compute things if I set it to 1/3’s stops, which I really don’t want to do during a sunset when things are rapidly changing.

So I’m back to my trusty Sekonic.

Can you explain this?

[Kiwi7475]

Can you explain this?

Sure. First let me say that this may not apply to others, this is just my own metering flow combined with trying to be particularly accurate when I shoot slides when light conditions are quickly changing.

With my Sekonic spot meter, when you enforce a given aperture, e.g. F22, say you get a reading of 1/8s of a second and a reminder of 4/10ths. So now you know that you can set the shutter to 1/8s and adjust the aperture to a bit passed the first submark in your shutter (I'm assuming here you have a shutter like a Copal that shows markings in 1/3 steps between the nominal 1-stop apertures). Easy peasy. If don't do this type of adjustment, you are at risk of exposing up to 9/10ths off from where the meter tells you (not a good thing particularly with slides!).

Since V4 of their SW, the Reveni spot meter stopped showing this reminder. The idea was that the SW added the capability of metering to 1/2 and 1/3 stops, so it would seem that having a reminder is obsolete. But that's not the case for my metering flow. If you set it to, say, 1/3s stops, then you will get the time needed to expose in 1/3 of a stop, which obviously you cannot set on your shutter. So for example, the meter will tell you 1/80s but you can only set your shutter to 1/60s. So now in my mind I need to convert back that difference into an aperture difference. It's not complicated math but it's the last thing I want to be doing when the light is rapidly changing.

One approach is then to shoot in 1/3's but in shutter priority, and let the meter pick the apertures for you, which resolves converting shutter speeds that are not possible. But that's not my flow. Right? I want to specify the aperture because I know what it will take to keep things in focus for a particular scene, and I don't want to iterate or change modes or guess the exposure time.

Another approach is to use the EV reading as a rounding reminder. For example, say you take a reading of EV 11.4. In 1-stop mode, the meter would give the shutter/aperture pair for a rounded down value of EV 11, so there is a +0.4 rounding remainder left over (in half stop it rounds to the nearest 1/2, and third to the nearest 1/3). So basically you could set it to whole stops and then just adjust the aperture by at most +/-0.5 based on the EV reading. This would seem to resolve the problem, but there's a catch. If the EV reading ends exactly in .5 is it rounded up (ie. a 10.5 is considered an EV of 11, such that it would really correspond to a reminder of -0.5); and the rounding is done on 2 decimals, so a 11.49 would display as EV 11.5 but would be rounded down to 11 for the aperture/shutter math. What this means is that you're "exposing" yourself to making significant errors if the readings fall on these boundaries.

For all these reasons, personally I've gone back to using my Sekonic.

[nolindan]

Dropping the 1/3 stop aperture readout was a big boo-boo.

Modern SLR's let you set the shutter speed in 1/3's of a stop (ie 1/80 ...). But there is no need for a separate meter with a modern SLR although I'm sure there are a few who will clip it to their F6.

Outside of that the design is rather brilliant. I was skeptical of the optic-less aiming system for the spot meter but I built a mock-up of it and it works really well.

A spot meter only makes sense, to my mind, for Zone System work. If I am lugging a 4x5 or 8x10 along with tripod and all the other paraphernalia a Pentax meter doesn't add anything to my burden. So a super small meter is more a problem (where is that darned thing...) than a help.

Thinking about it a bit more, the meter would be a help to me if clipped to my Speed Graphic, where I go out for some hand-led LF work with a pocket full of film holders.

I would like to find a good meter for clipping to a meterless Leica et al. or a MF folder. I don't really need spot metering in this situation - what I would like is a clip-on matrix meter. You can't do ZS stuff with 35mm or MF as you can't develop each frame individually, and in any case with modern films and VC paper there isn't much need to. What you do need is to be able to place the important parts of the scene in the linear part of the film's HD curve - which is what matrix metering tries to accomplish for you.

Metering with a cell phone and appropriate app would work for an external matrix meter, but a clip on meter on my Nettar would be much more convenient. Especially if combined with a rangefinder.

For the authentic Nettar experience I set the exposure by a sunny-16 exposure table. The one my Mother had taped inside the case of her Nettar has blown away - but as it was for Kodacolor-II it didn't have much use any more, only sentimental value.

[David Schaller]

The Voigtlander external meter is a pretty good averaging meter for a cold shoe.

[Alan Klein]

Sure. First let me say that this may not apply to others, this is just my own metering flow combined with trying to be particularly accurate when I shoot slides when light conditions are quickly changing.

With my Sekonic spot meter, when you enforce a given aperture, e.g. F22, say you get a reading of 1/8s of a second and a reminder of 4/10ths. So now you know that you can set the shutter to 1/8s and adjust the aperture to a bit passed the first submark in your shutter (I'm assuming here you have a shutter like a Copal that shows markings in 1/3 steps between the nominal 1-stop apertures). Easy peasy. If don't do this type of adjustment, you are at risk of exposing up to 9/10ths off from where the meter tells you (not a good thing particularly with slides!).

Since V4 of their SW, the Reveni spot meter stopped showing this reminder. The idea was that the SW added the capability of metering to 1/2 and 1/3 stops, so it would seem that having a reminder is obsolete. But that's not the case for my metering flow. If you set it to, say, 1/3s stops, then you will get the time needed to expose in 1/3 of a stop, which obviously you cannot set on your shutter. So for example, the meter will tell you 1/80s but you can only set your shutter to 1/60s. So now in my mind I need to convert back that difference into an aperture difference. It's not complicated math but it's the last thing I want to be doing when the light is rapidly changing.

One approach is then to shoot in 1/3's but in shutter priority, and let the meter pick the apertures for you, which resolves converting shutter speeds that are not possible. But that's not my flow. Right? I want to specify the aperture because I know what it will take to keep things in focus for a particular scene, and I don't want to iterate or change modes or guess the exposure time.

Another approach is to use the EV reading as a rounding reminder. For example, say you take a reading of EV 11.4. In 1-stop mode, the meter would give the shutter/aperture pair for a rounded down value of EV 11, so there is a +0.4 rounding remainder left over (in half stop it rounds to the nearest 1/2, and third to the nearest 1/3). So basically you could set it to whole stops and then just adjust the aperture by at most +/-0.5 based on the EV reading. This would seem to resolve the problem, but there's a catch. If the EV reading ends exactly in .5 is it rounded up (ie. a 10.5 is considered an EV of 11, such that it would really correspond to a reminder of -0.5); and the rounding is done on 2 decimals, so a 11.49 would display as EV 11.5 but would be rounded down to 11 for the aperture/shutter math. What this means is that you're "exposing" yourself to making significant errors if the readings fall on these boundaries.

For all these reasons, personally I've gone back to using my Sekonic.
I think I understand. I'm not familiar with the Reveni, but can you select aperture or shutter priority mode? If so, use the Aperture mode to take a reading set for f22. You'll get a shutter read in a full stop. Then switch to Shutter Priority mode using the full stop given. The result will be the aperture setting in 1/3 stops. Then adjust the aperture ring on the lens to the setting indicated. Would this work?

[Kiwi7475]

I think I understand. I'm not familiar with the Reveni, but can you select aperture or shutter priority mode? If so, use the Aperture mode to take a reading set for f22. You'll get a shutter read in a full stop. Then switch to Shutter Priority mode using the full stop given. The result will be the aperture setting in 1/3 stops. Then adjust the aperture ring on the lens to the setting indicated. Would this work?

Yes that would work — but changing modes and setting it up as you describes takes longer than what my patience is willing to take…. Can you imagine saying, wait let me make sure I did this right, so you have to do it all over again, and then the light changes (because you’re in between sunset and twilight) and you have to do it again, etc.

It’s just not practical in those conditions. Why bother when I can do it in one shot with another meter? It’s not like the size or weight is such an advantage for large format…. Maybe if I’m going out with my Texas Leica and I mess up a couple of shots in a 120 roll, ok, but at ~ $30 per shot of an E6 8x10 (film and development) …. No thanks.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

The meter shows 1/3 stops, just not in fractional notation. So, rather than 1/30 +2/3 it shows 1/50, and similarly with aperture. Is that what you mean?

[Kiwi7475]

The meter shows 1/3 stops, just not in fractional notation. So, rather than 1/30 +2/3 it shows 1/50, and similarly with aperture. Is that what you mean?

In short, yes you can look at it like that, ie. when configured for 1/3 stop steps, in aperture mode the SW computes the closest shutter time in 1/3 steps, without providing the fractional stop relative to a 1-stop shutter time. And when configured to 1 stop steps, it does not provide the residual to the computed exposure either. And all other approaches to work around it have some gotchas.

[lassethomas]

Some of us had problems with the Revenue spot meter not showing decimal fractions of a stop.
I'm not going to explain again, Kiwi7475 do so very well in post 90 (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?162297-Reveni-spot-meter&p=1628964&viewfull=1#post1628964).

Well, for other reasons I was in contact with Matt of Reveni about a month ago, and as a side note at last got him to understand the ambiguity where you in some instances can not derive if to correct up or down (due to rounding).
And he agreed to fix this.
And so he did. A new firmware was released today.

https://www.reveni-labs.com/spot-meter-firmware-update

So now you can display whole steps with decimal fraction, like most other spot meters, at least my Sekonic and Minolta.

Now at last it's usable to me.