|
|
Post by squeamishossifrage on Dec 24, 2022 7:55:10 GMT
Firstly, hand-held meters - does anybody still use them? I have four, three of which are in fairly regular use, all Sekonic. The unused one is a Polaris, which is nice and accurate, but didn't bring anything to the party. The Sekonics are a Zoom Master, with a zoom to adjust the spot size, a Twinmate which I use mainly for my fully manual tilt/shift lens which somehow completely screws up the in-camera metering (they both share the same 24mm field of view), and my favourite, a 40 year old View Spot. I use the View Spot for zone system metering - but does anybody else use this system anymore? I find it invaluable as although the dynamic range of sensors has improved in the last ten years, my cameras are stuck in the range of colour print film. By using a spot meter to measure the highlights and shadows, I can set the zone accurately, to take full advantage of the range of the sensor. Any subsequent exposure adjustment can be done in post-processing. The real delight of the View Spot is that it uses scales and dials, not a digital display, so you can see at a glance the full range of exposure combinations on offer. (So does the Twinmate, another reason it's a keeper) So, two questions - does anybody still occasionally use a hand held meter, and is anybody else still using the zone system to match the image to the range of the 'sensor', be it digital or film, or am I the only antediluvian?  |
|
|
|
Post by John Farrell on Dec 24, 2022 8:27:55 GMT
In Roger Hicks' book "Perfect Exposure" he states that "In order to explore the full panoply of the Zone System, not only do you need to be able to develop each exposure separately, you also need big negatives. The former is essential because development is always matched to exposure, instead of being the kind of compromise which is inevitable when there are mixed subjects on a single roll".
That being said, digital exposures obviously give the opportunity to individualise exposure for each shot.
I use a hand held meter when I take out one of my meterless antiques, although lately I have been practising sunny 16 exposure, and relying on the latitude of the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Dec 24, 2022 8:56:07 GMT
Roger was fond of saying that there is no single perfect exposure. The dynamic range of film, or sensor, is so much less than the combination of eye and brain.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterob on Dec 24, 2022 9:06:01 GMT
Yes, I use a hand held meter occasionally. With a tilt/shift lens because I can never remember the exposure before adjustment, when I am photographing moving objects where the background changes a lot in brightness and in woods sometimes as light through an open canopy can confuse the camera quite a lot. Usually incident light but occasional spot metering - the meter will average several spot readings. I have a film camera without metering but it hasn't been used since I started with digital.
Zone system. I've never been consistent enough to make proper use of it though I have tried. Especially in the '90s when I mostly used FP4 developed myself because I couldn't afford commercial colour processing. You do need to think through the whole process from composition to print and I'm not good at pre-visualisation. Using a hand-held meter for spot metering highlights, mid-tones and shadows you do need to think in zone system terms in order to combine the results.
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Dec 24, 2022 9:59:10 GMT
Nah, I just guess and adjust based on the histogram/review screen.
|
|
|
|
Post by squeamishossifrage on Dec 24, 2022 11:45:19 GMT
Roger was fond of saying that there is no single perfect exposure. The dynamic range of film, or sensor, is so much less than the combination of eye and brain. In essence, that is correct. Even ignoring the biochemical action of rhodopsin (the chemical in rods only that makes long term adjustments) it is still way above what any sensor can deliver, but this due to the phenomenal speed of the iris, and the fact that you cannot truly 'see' what is not in the central area of vision. Generally speaking it is considered that the retina itself only has a range of two orders of magnitude, whereas with both neurological and biochemical adaptations it has a range of twelve to fourteen. |
|
|
|
Post by nickr on Dec 24, 2022 11:57:35 GMT
Roger's major issue with the Zone System was that it was an overcomplicated oversimplification of the topic, kidnapped by gatekeepers.
I don't use meters a lot these days, almost never for digital work, but I have a few:
Pentax Spotmeter V
Weston Euromaster II
Sekonic L-308s (mostly for flash, which I do use for digital)
Gossen Digisix
Gossen Lunasix F with spot attachment
The Euromaster is my fave for incident readings. The Digisix is fantastically portable, so gets most use. The Lunasix doesn't really get much use at all.
The Pentax - ah, well that's the one I use when I'm applying my version of the Zone System - checking that I can get an exposure that will work for all the key elements of a scene.
To pick up on Pete's point, I find that my mirrorless cameras meter perfectly with tilt/shift lenses even when at maximum movement, a major plus.
|
|
|
|
Post by zou on Dec 24, 2022 12:47:36 GMT
Haven't used my Weston for years. Even if I were shooting something like large format I'd probably just meter using my digital - readings from shadow and highlight areas in which detail is desired and making sure that the overall exposure does its best to fall within that range.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Dec 24, 2022 13:35:03 GMT
Roger was fond of saying that there is no single perfect exposure. The dynamic range of film, or sensor, is so much less than the combination of eye and brain. In essence, that is correct. Even ignoring the biochemical action of rhodopsin (the chemical in rods only that makes long term adjustments) it is still way above what any sensor can deliver, but this due to the phenomenal speed of the iris, and the fact that you cannot truly 'see' what is not in the central area of vision. Generally speaking it is considered that the retina itself only has a range of two orders of magnitude, whereas with both neurological and biochemical adaptations it has a range of twelve to fourteen. There is also the fact that we tend to compress what we "see" to some extent, which is all part of how we get the dynamic range. |
|
|
|
Post by zx9 on Dec 24, 2022 14:22:48 GMT
I still have a couple of Minolta meters, one is incident the other a reflected spot, the incident meter is used occasionally with my Leica M2 thought if I need a Sunny F/16 check I can use the light meter app on my phone. The spot meter, I can't remember when I last used it probably because it is not as nice to use as the Pentax digital spot I foolishly sold when I realised that the Zone System was not for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by squeamishossifrage on Dec 24, 2022 14:43:46 GMT
I still have a couple of Minolta meters, one is incident the other a reflected spot, the incident meter is used occasionally with my Leica M2 thought if I need a Sunny F/16 check I can use the light meter app on my phone. The spot meter, I can't remember when I last used it probably because it is not as nice to use as the Pentax digital spot I foolishly sold when I realised that the Zone System was not for me. I once bought a Pentax Spotmeter 5 from eBay, and loved it because it was another 'scale and dial' type, but unfortunately the light that illuminated the needle didn't work, rendering it useless in most circumstances, so it had to go back - most regrettably. |
|
|
|
Post by zx9 on Dec 24, 2022 14:53:24 GMT
I still have a couple of Minolta meters, one is incident the other a reflected spot, the incident meter is used occasionally with my Leica M2 thought if I need a Sunny F/16 check I can use the light meter app on my phone. The spot meter, I can't remember when I last used it probably because it is not as nice to use as the Pentax digital spot I foolishly sold when I realised that the Zone System was not for me. I once bought a Pentax Spotmeter 5 from eBay, and loved it because it was another 'scale and dial' type, but unfortunately the light that illuminated the needle didn't work, rendering it useless in most circumstances, so it had to go back - most regrettably. The digital spot meter gave you a EV on the LED display which you transferred to the scales around the lens, very easy to use. |
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Dec 24, 2022 18:56:46 GMT
I have a Minolta Autometer IV F which, as the name implies, has a flash metering capability. I have occasionally found the flash metering useful with multi flash set-ups but I rarely use flash these days. I bought it in Jack's part of the world, though not from Jack.
|
|
|
|
Post by pixelpuffin on Dec 28, 2022 17:15:40 GMT
I recently found my old Polaris flash meter that I used throughout my college years back in the early 90’s
It still works perfectly as I had removed the battery and stored it with bags of silica gel.
I decided to check eBay to see how much they were fetching… stumbled on the same meter but with separate attachments for spot metering and a flat invercone attachment for copying work. All boxed, with instructions and including another Polaris to boot.
Couldn’t help myself as the price was too tempting, it all looks never to have seen use!!
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Dec 28, 2022 18:37:15 GMT
I recently found my old Polaris flash meter that I used throughout my college years back in the early 90’s It still works perfectly as I had removed the battery and stored it with bags of silica gel. I decided to check eBay to see how much they were fetching… stumbled on the same meter but with separate attachments for spot metering and a flat invercone attachment for copying work. All boxed, with instructions and including another Polaris to boot. Couldn’t help myself as the price was too tempting, it all looks never to have seen use!! You might have been pleasantly surprised but it turns out that the Minolta holds its value rather well. |
|
