alissaspieces Loc: New York

Honestly, in a studio situation I wouldn't want to work without a handheld meter to meter all of the lights properly and then adjust as needed. But in landscapes, the best investment you can get is graduated neutral density filters. The difference between the light and dark areas in a scene during sunrise, sunset is huge and your camera will not be able to capture it properly. You can choose to take multiple exposures and then blend later on or you can get some ND filters and help to even out the scene for the camera. They are not cheap but a much better investment for landscape photography in my opinion. My personal method is I use ND fitlers and then I also take a bunch of exposures to see once I get back to the computer which looks the best.

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

Coming from the film days I wouldn't work without a light meter. Even though I now use digital, I still use a meter. To many false readings with a TTL as it tends to average readings and is usually not accurate on a grey scale unless you do a grey scale reading. I use an old Gossen and my newer Sekonic 478DU which can't be beat if you use the DTS software.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Carl,
Great question and I can only give you my opinion. The answer is yes. For the average, everyday photo, I'll pretty much stick to my in camera meter. However, my metering technique has been adjusted to take advantage of my camera's capabilities.

I've written and article regarding exposure. You can find it here:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/user_page.jsp?upnum=1527

As for those photographs where the exposure is of great importance, I rely on a Sekonic L-758DR. The reason for this is that the meter has been profiled for my particular camera, a Nikon D700. It also takes into consideration those points mentioned in the article mentioned above.

So, yes, it's an added luxury that provides the optimum exposure. However, like any tool, practice enhances your skills in using it.
--Bob

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Most of the time the camera meter will give you enough information for the landscape photography you want to make. If you are always finding yourself in tricky lighting situations, then a separate meter giving you an incident reading or spot readings may get you through those situations. It really comes down to how many times you are in those situations and how important it is to get the shot. If you are making money from those shots, it is probably is worth the investment. If it is really important that you get the shots you want, then spend the money for the meter.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

The histograms show all peaks as clipped at the top. Would this indicate over-exposure?

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Light meters are an invaluable tool, but to use them you really need to understand exposure. Get the book "Understanding Exposure" by Brian Peterson and give it a read before you buy any meter. Modern, in-camera meters are much improved from yesteryear, but there is nothing better than an incident reading when practical. For studio type flash photography, a meter is a necessity. Best of luck.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Having the histogram data crammed against the right side of the graph would indicate over exposure.

However, if you understand your camera's capabilities, it just might mean your at a correct exposure.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-342704-1.html

--Bob

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

There are a number of ways to make accurate exposures... it pays to know how to use and be comfortable with several of them.

I nearly always carry an incident/flash meter. Now I use a Sekonic L358, which isn't made any longer, but the L308 is almost the same (the L358 can optionally be fitted with a radio trigger, the L308 can't). I also have a couple older Minolta incident/flash meters as backup (were sold as Konica-Minolta for a while... now are made and sold by Kenko).

An incident meter, used right, is a quick way to set an accurate exposure. Incident meters measure the light falling onto a subject, rather than what's being reflected off of it. Because of that there's typically no need for Exposure Compensation, which is usually necessary when using a reflectance meter, such as those built into all cameras. Another benefit with many incident meters is that they often are able to very accurately measure flash (esp. studio strobe lighting of various types).

There are times a separate handheld meter just isn't practical, though... So I feel it's also important to know how to use your camera's built-in reflectance meter. This type of meter is strongly influenced by the tonality of subjects and scenes, so Exposure Compensation is a necessary tool to use the meter well (and, by extension, the various auto exposure modes of your camera). Rather than go into all the details of this here, I suggest you get a copy of Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure", which is all about using the camera's internal metering system. (Edit: I see I'm not the first to recommend this book. I would note that it emphasizes using the camera's built in meter and doesn't pay much attention to accessory meters. Still, IMO it should be required reading for all photographers.)

I've also used 1 degree spot meter a lot in the past. I especially used this type of meter when I was shooting B&W film with the Zone System. However, IMO a spot meter is only a marginally useful method with color film and digital imaging, so I use this type meter a lot less frequently now.

pebal7-123 Loc: WPG. MB. Canada

Light Meter And Exposure Compensation

Yes its really nice to be a member of this Forum. There are
lots of things to be learned. Although you have not seen
and meet these photographers in person you can copy and apply
to yourself their knowledge and experiences.

There is no stupid as they said. You can ask any question
about photography regardless on the level you have reached.
I registered on this Forum on March 16,2012 and I never
regret that I am a member. My name is Peter.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Most of the histograms show 'pointy' peaks across the horizontal. When some are high enough to look 'chopped' does that mean something for the image. Clustering at one side or the other do tell image information as cited.