Light Meters!! Do You Use One?

russellsnr

russellsnr

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,121
Name
Russell
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,just wonder how many people have faith in the in camera light meter compaired to a seperate hand held one in landscape photography, my thinking is, the in camera meter as part of the camera would cost £??? as the camera its self (dependant on make and model) mid range around £800 or so but a seperate meter alone can cost from £120 upwards of £300.
Do you use a hand held meter and if so why?
Thanks
Russ.
 
I do have one but use it less and less as I find the modern matrix/spot metering so good, it's good to have in the studio though.
 
I use a sekonic L758 for the 1 degree spot and general ease of use. I started using it originally with my non-metered film cameras and found I like it so much I now use it with my digital as well.

I can also understand why many people don't use one, it's very much a matter of personal preference like most things in photography
 
No, I dont, simply because I've not been able to afford one yet :)
 
I have a Sekonic L-558 with 1 degree spot meter, incident dome and more functions and modes than than you can shake a stick at. It also has the optional radio module fitted for firing pocket wizards remotely. I do use it now and again - mostly with medium format, but I must admit it gets used less and less these days.

Sorry - as for 'why?' - you just can't put a price on a 1 degree spot for measuring some tiny part of a scene - even at a distance. Spot meters in cameras don't take anywhere near as narrow a reading.
 
Last edited:
Used to use them religiously when shooting film, especially in the studio on MF and 5x4" but I trust the meter in my DSLR and at the end of the day, the correct exposure value is the correct exposure value, regardless of whether you meter with a camera or a handheld. It makes no difference to the shot at the end of the day, just how easily you get to that exposure.....
 
If I'm using digital, I dont see the point - camera has a spot meter that's pretty dam accurate when in the right hands. Also has the benefit of the other modes should you need them.

I only use a meter for film, where the camera either does not have metering, or I dont trust it lol - oh and of course for studio work.

For walk about photography, I dont see the point in spending £300 on a hand-held meter, if anything its just something else to carry/get in the way/ loose/ get stolen. Built in meter should more than suffice :)

Just my opinion of course - each to their own!

EDIT: Just seen the OP was talking about landscape photography, doh! 1 degree spot is very useful, and the ability to set readings to memory for averaging etc. is very handy
 
Last edited:
I use a Sekonic 308 for balancing up studio lights. Otherwise, never.

The camera's meter is actually more capable. It can do anything that a hand meter can do, and a few more things besides, but a hand meter is a lot more convenient for some of them.

The most accurate exposure measurement is displayed by the histogram. That is an actual image. The meter is only guessing, based on a set of assumptions that don't always apply. Usually works though!
 
I have my Dad's old Weston Master meter, but I don't use it, finding the meter in the camera provides enough info, provided you know how to interpret it.
 
Use the Camera's on Digital,I may consider getting one for filmbutSince I have spot metering available to me on my OM I'm not in any huge rush.
 
OK folks many thanks for the replies seems the majority put faith in the on camera meter,
Anyone want to but a meter!!!!!:D;)
Russ
 
Until I went digital about years ago my mains camera didn't have a built in meter, so it was always in use - I had 4; two for studio flash, two for continuous. When I went digital I sold the costly meters and just kept the cheap ones, but only use one for flash now.

Paul
 
Weston Master II, but only when shooting film. A spot meter would be something to save towards as it would be useful, but they ain't cheap.
 
I find the meters in my Nikon D700+D300 fantastic, but I also have a collection of hand held meters, Weston master, nearly all the models, through to Minolta auto meters, including the Spotmeter F. I think using hand held meters gives you a better understanding of your camera's meter, and I find it relaxing to do things differently sometimes, makes you see things differently. maybe its just me.
 
There's definitely something to be said for a handheld meter, though I haven't used one for years.

I think it's time the camera mfrs built a meter that communicates with the camera. But that'd mean admitting that a reflected reading was inadequate after years of telling us the opposite.
 
Hi, I use a "Gossen Lunasix F" it can take reflected or incident readings both as a single reading or accumalitive, has a spot meter attachement, and can be used for ambient or flash readings.

I always use it in the studio and also use it to take incident readings on wedding work for consistency and then work manually.

Other than that I use the meter in the camera.
 
As long as there is still 35mm film around, I'm using my second hand Weston Master IV meter for my Minolta SR-1 camera which I bought second hand, because it don't have a built-in meter.

Otherwise if using my Minolta X-700 or my Nikon D200, I use the built-in meters.
 
Meters are stupid.
Cameras that link the exposure setting to the Meter, even MORE stupid.
They can very accurately measure light levels.
But they dont have a damn CLUE what they are looking at....
18%-Grey... the presumption that on average everything in your scene is about the colour of concrete.....
IS IT?
With such a huge presumption at the basis of thier calculations they can be as accurate as the atomic clock....doesn't mean they are RIGHT!

Old addage "a meter is only ever as accurate as the person reading it" is very very true. and if its a machine reading it.... even more so!

Do I use a hand held meter?

YES!

After all that. I have a selenium cell Leningrad V and another Selenium meter I inherited of my Grandad, I'm not sure the make of.

Do I use them?

Occassionally.... usually when I am playing with an old, meter-less film-camera.

Did a little experiment just after Chrsitmas; compared variouse readings off the Leningrad against what I got from my new Nikon D3200... and compared to the f16 sunny rule...

curiousely enough... the thirty odd year old, soviet made, selenium cell Leningrad, gave meter readings withing half a stop of Nikon's suggested settings, with averages almost bang on identical..... guess what? They were, all within a stop of "Hmm its a LITTLE cloudy.. f16? Maybe f8 and the ISO set for shutter... oooh.. hang on, if I look that way 1/3 of the frames in shaddow... up 1/3 stop on shutter"

The wise are the master of the meter and use it to inform their judgement.
Those without judgement, are slaves to the meter, until informed to the error.
 
I use a light meter! It's called a 'Canon EOS 7D' :D
 
markmullen said:
The limitation with that is that it only covers reflective, and to a lesser extent, spot metering. It can't do incident readings, or flash terribly well.
Click to expand...

It actually does flash quite well, in fact it'll do exposure tricks that a flash meter can't. ;)
 
markmullen said:
The limitation with that is that it only covers reflective, and to a lesser extent, spot metering. It can't do incident readings, or flash terribly well.
Click to expand...

Incident readings are easy with a camera meter - grey card, palm of hand +1.3 stops, same thing. Or put a diffuser over the lens and use it exactly like a hand meter.

I'll give you flash metering though ;)
 
Hand held light meter for film, but rely on camera's meter for digital.
 
HoppyUK said:
Just eye-ball it, being careful not to blink :D
Click to expand...

As my kids would say:

Whatever :shake:

I suspect you examine the image on the rear of your camera and adjust to taste?
 
Phil V said:
As my kids would say:

Whatever :shake:

I suspect you examine the image on the rear of your camera and adjust to taste?
Click to expand...

Don't think I have owned or used a reflected light hand-meter since 1970s, but always had a flash meter for studio.

For single light set-up, I don't use a meter but for anything more complicated a meter makes life so much easier to get light ratios right, or at least ball-park.

For final ratios though, I will go by the LCD image. A decent LCD gives a pretty good representation and is more reliable than a meter due to cosine law variance that can be tricky to predict. And as far as ratios is concerned, what looks right is right.

Then for final exposure setting, I will always check the histogram, probably push things to the right a bit, and take a very careful look at what the binkies are doing. After that, final expose settings could be as much as two stops away from what an incident reading 'thinks' might be right.

There are too many variables going that a separate hand-meter has no clue about. All it can do is make a standard exposure recommendation based on a set of assumptions that may or may not apply. The LCD, histogram, and particularly blinkies are the closest representation of what you've actually got. They're inherently very accurate, and if you know your camera and processing regime properly, it's hard to be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top