rdw845 Loc: San Francisco Area

Just for the uninitiated, the % information indicates the amount of light from flash as opposed to non flash light. Changing the shutter speed gives a larger or smaller amount of incident light.

Bipod

Cameras are sophisticated, indeed.. But the human brain is much more sophisticated.
They haven't yet figured out how to put Ansel Adams in a chip.

When you need a spot meter, you need a spot meter. And only an incident light meter
really does the job of an incident light meter.

Instruments and tools do what they do. It's not matter which is "newer", "more sophisticated",
"higher tech", "smarter", "holier" or "more magic power". Or even that most compelling
of properties: "more expensive".

Does anyone really want to use a screwdriver that has "artificial intelligence"? The best thing
a screwdriver is that it only turns the screws that you tell it to turn. Tools that try to make
decisions for you are bad tools.

If you use a spot meter, you can find out the lumanance of a particular area in the scene.
That's one more piece of accurate, objective information to guide you, the photographer.

Photographers are essential to photography--no matter what people on this forum think,
or what manufacturer's want them to think.

Changing to new gear and new technology all the time is a giant distraction from the task
of making good photos.

BebuLamar

I like to discuss gear even if I don't take a single picture. What is wrong with that? We can do whatever we want.

tallshooter

Don't Hate me, Lightmeter app, android gets it done.

Bipod

Actually, I've seen some great photography apps for Android phones.

For one thing, there are lots of little caclulator programs that would be great to
have in the field. I'd move some of mine to Android if changing GUIs
wasn't such a hassle.

Also, a smart phone makes it possible to look up information: lens performance
data, camera manuals, etc.

It would be interesting to see the specs on that Android light meter app.
Also it would be great to see the source code, if it's available somewhere.

Bipod

Sorry if I implied otherwise, BabuLamar. My post wasn't directed at anyone, just at the state of the forum.

Guess I'm still smarting because my "Don McCullin portrait -- what camera is this?" topic was moved to Siberia
("Links and Resources"). It's OK to discuss some amateur's gear, but not Don McCullin's. Is that because it's film?

Bill_de Loc: US

It was probably moved because you are not supposed to start a thread with links. Had you discussed the subject in the first post you could have supported it with links in subsequent posts in the thread. That is spelled out somewhere in the forum rules. Most sections have a list of rules as the first post. But it is all done manually, so some get missed.

--

DennisC. Loc: Antelope, CA

Don’t forget about the Minolta Flash Meter V, my personal favorite.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

They haven't yet figured out how to put Ansel Adams in a chip.
The company manufacturing Arsenal seems to be trying to.
--Bob

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

As usual, an issue of semantics, etymology and nomenclature has entered the thread- "light meter vs. exposure meter". This time, however, it's a good issue to think about in the discussion of exposure meters. True enough, a LIGHT meter measures quantities and sometimes color temperatures of light and the readouts are expressed in Foot-Candles or Lux-Candles and the the case of color temperature in Kelvins (K degrees). Of course none of this information pertains directly to exposure settings, white balance or color filtration. The information derived form theses meters is useful to those designing, setting up, analyzing or verifying lighting conditions in a space for architectural or interior decorating purposes, scientific analysis, color matching accuracy, office, school, or factory lighting standards or some othere specific purpose other than photography.

Early EXPOSURE meters were, in fact light meters that were equipped with a manual calculation dial which converted the Foot Candle or Lux Candle readings or a more simplified numerical scale into exposure data. The dial coordinated the film speed, the light quantity and then photgraher coud the choose form an array of resulting f/stops and shutter speeds or select a Exposure Value (EV) for cameras that had such settings. My point is, that dial required a thinking process that fast digital readouts on current meters does not demand. The Weston Master line of meters incorporated a calculator dial with even more data to add the mental process- it had indications of the film's latitude and dynamic range that coud be applied to the Zone System. Simply stated- you needed to use your head! The meter and the calculator dial presented the sensitometry and the photographer had to apply the art and technique by factoring in depth of field, motion stopping enablement and the processing treatment for the exposure settings selected. Most of theses older meter had analog meter movements which were not necessarily precise as today's direct digital readouts but a single aperture or shutter speed reading is not as telling as the layout on the old calculator dials, which again, forced the photographer to make more individualized and informed decisions. Some of the latest models do feature automatic averaging and integration of flash and ambient ligh readings. I prefer to make these readings separately, do my own calculations and alter the relationships according to the effect I wish to acheive.

Color temperature meters would reveal the spectral nature of the light but no filtration information- the photographer had to know and test his color emulsions and filter accordingly. Later color temperature meters, meters could be pre-set to a Kelvin target and the readout would indicate the correction or conversion filter.

So...what's my point- nostalgia? history? pining for the past? Neither! There is no magic exposure meter that will do all the work, in camera or in any hand held metering system and there is not one meter or mode that will do every job in every situation.

The most important aspect of any metering technique is where to PROBE, where to take the reading from and specifically how to position, hold and aim the meter's receptor cell. The knowledge critical for reflected, spot, incident light metering in an out of the camera. It's simple enough, with a reflected light or spot meter to assume that reading form an 18% gray card or an equivalent zone on the subject will suffice. This, however, is subject to revision depending on the photographer's intentions and technique. With negative black and white and color films, some photographers preferred to meter for adequate detail in the shadows in then, within the films curve, print down for highlight detail. This, of course would not apply to transparency films and digital photography in that this would result in serious overexposure and blown out highlights. The method then is to meter for the diffuse highlights and fill the shadows or making certin the are in range and let the specular highlight fall where the may. In the zone system, basically, the photgraher assigns a segment of the gray scale to each area of density and the alter the process to accommodate compression or expansion of the dynamic range. This was originally a film based technique, however, some workers apply this somewhat to digital photography.

An incident exposure meter works well in many situations, however there are variations and caveats to this method as well. The basic probing method is to place the meters light collector at the subject and aim it toward the camera. The dome shape of the receptor then integrates the light and shadow falling on the subjects and the meter processes this as 18% gray. This works well to some extent but falls short in techniques that may require separate highlight and shadow readings or where ratios are being calculated. Some incident ligh meters have interchangeable light receptors that accommodate a flat receptor which tends less to integrate ligh and shadow or excessive skylight (which can inaccurately influence readings) so as to ascertain more specific readings othere modes have a recessable dome for theses applications. All of theses incident light techniques and applications are easily practicable in a studio or subject accessible location environment., however, if spot readings are required for distant subjects, such as landscapes, a spot meter may be the better choice. Of course, substitute incident readings can be obtained in certin lighting conditions.

Reflected light readings require more attention to probing technique- again a "zone" on the subject that is the equivalent or approximates of the 18% gray card. The meter has to be close enough to zone in on the proper area but care has to be taken so as not to read the meters or the photographer's shadow. Spot meters make it easier to obtain reflected ligh readings form a distance- I find a 1 to 5 degree areas of acceptance is good enough for most subjects.

Personally, I find my latest digital camera's metering system to work surprisingly well. There is no reason why any system in good working condition shoud malfunction or produce inaccurate results if used judiciously with some of the aforementioned metering techniques in mind. It is of the utmost importance to fully understand how your camera's metering system works and the various options on its menu. There are spot, matrix and various integrated reading systems on different cameras so you must lean to navigate the options you select and apply them appropriately. Of your camera has a center weighted spot reading system, you have to "show it" where to read according to your knowledge of probing technique. That means you must apply the spot to the zone you need to read, lock it in and the recompose your image- most camera systems will facilitate this methods. If you are working in conditions, such as with rapidly occurring action, where the is no time to go through theses steps, you will have to depend on othere methods of more integrated readings to operatein manual mode with pre-set exposures.

Most importantly, you need to realize that all equipmet may have idiosyncrasies and variations. You have to get to know each of you meters, camera bodies and lenses and from experience you will know when and how to compensate for some of the gremlins, quirks and incompatibilities.

In my own case, in may recurring lighting situation and in-studio, I can set my exposures instinctively or by rote. I generally use my meters and metering systems in more unfamiliar or odd lighting situations or to verify settings before a critical shoot. With automatic and custom white balance, theses days, I hardly use my color temperature meter. Even with all this technology, I still encourage photograhers to bracket exposure whenever possible, monitor their histogram when practical and learn to interpret the images on there LED screens with a reasonable frequency of chimping.

Exposure meters are great tools and worth the investment as long as you really find the need for all the aforementioned exposure control. They are especially useful in odd or unfamiliar lighting situations, setting up studio gear and verifying the output of flash gear. As I alluded to, there are may situations that can fool you meter or your camera's metering system and you can work around theses issues if you understand exactly how each system or technique works. Don't allow theses gremlins to fool you!

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

That is 100% False!
Camera meters have been used with GREAT success for decades. Show me where they are less reliable and less accurate than a handheld meter, reading reflected light, IF used correctly by a knowledgeable operator!???
I can shoot 60 images, all in different light in one minute using my camera’s spot meter and all are in proper exposure unless I miss the meter placement!!!
Try that with a handheld meter and you will fail miserably!!!
SS

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

True enough, especially with many of the current cameras. Basically, in many cases, the camera does the work in that we can choose a mode, select a program, an aperture or shutter priority mode and the automation will kick in. This works better in the hands of an experienced operator.

My first TTL meter system was on a Nikon FTN and a Nikormat that I used shooting news. Of course back then we had to do more work what with match needle operation- things were not as swift and fast and sometimes manual operation and the motor drive was a better choice.

Perhaps some photographers were left with a bad taste in the mouth regarding TTL metering because of some of the old systems that were retrofitted to manual cameras. I had a "meter prism" that was supposed to enable TTL metering for the Hasselblad system- not too good- never coud get that properly calibrated. The one for the Mamiya RZ left much to be desired as we but that's back in the olden days.

Of course, I can't speak for every make model and system. Lately, I have never had issues with the TTL systems in Canon and Nikon gear. All surprisingly accurate in some pretty difficult lighting conditions where fast performance was required.

Some folks just like to make extreme statements about equipment and methods. I think there is a time and a place for built in AND hand held metering. On system can't do every job- common sense!

aubreybogle Loc: Albuquerque, NM

Thank you for this informative discussion of a little understood subject. Took me back to my days shooting Kodachrome with a Gossen meter in the early 60's.

Shutterbug57

I have a Pentax reflective meter and a Sekonic 358 incident/flash meter. Except for measuring flash, I tend to use the MyLightMeter Pro app when shooting with my Mamiya M645. For cameras with built in meters, I just use the built in meter. I will have a 4x5 camera in the next couple of weeks, I expect to use the app for that as well. The app does incident and reflective readings. In addition to the ISO, aperture and Shutter speed, it tells you the Max EV and dynamic range of the shot. It also spot meters and will average readings.

Bipod

I read the forum rules. Didn't see that. Does anyone have a link to the rule against links?