Pocket lightmeter?

[Terrywoodenpic]

I would define your choice in two parts. First between old and new.
In the Old bracket, top of the heap must be a weston meter the newest of which is the Euromaster ll.
Weston meters were used by just about every professional photographer since the 1930's I would not care to rely on a weston older than a Weston V.
Westons usually come with an invercone for incident light readings. but are essentially reflective meters.
I would not chose an old CDS meter as there are likely to be battery problems as virtually all of them were designed for mercury batteries which gave highly stable voltages... modern replacement batteries do not.
The better of the Sekonic meters are very expensive... even 30 year old ones. They are available new and second hand and many of them will meter flash exposures as well.
But as we are talking about use with an older film camera that is unlikely to be a major concern for you.

When it comes to new meters there is almost nothing worth while, that is cheap.

On balance I would settle on a Weston Euromaster l or ll. many come up on ebay and there should be no need to spend more than £30 for a good one.
But always ask if it is accurate. Then if it is not you could return it. If you do it will serve you well for decades to come.

The need for a spot meter is hard to justify, as few people ever learn to use one correctly. Even then few if any professionals rely on them for general work.
most modern spot meters measure measure somewhere between 1 and 6 degrees.. and in-camera ones even more. which is neither fish nor fowl. the best scientific ones measure around 1/2 degree or less.

 

[steveo_mcg]

I would argue that most of these meters are generally for incident metering. I haven't used the top-of-the-line Sekonics, so maybe they're different, but I've found the reflective capabilities of the meters I've used to be fairly restrictive, personally, as I can't tell for certain the area of the scene that the meter is viewing for the reflective measurement. Plus, with the angle of the reflective readings from most meters being approximately 40 degrees, I think that the reflective reading is only accurate for normal lenses.

You sure you've not mixed them up? Doesnt an incident meter mesure the light falling on a subject, whist a reflective meter measures the light returned (reflected) from the subject. The weston style meters are all (?) reflective type.

Strike that. The group test all appear to be incident meters. The weston ones I think aren't and the smartphone ones aren't. Either way, not spots.

 

[skysh4rk]

You sure you've not mixed them up? Doesnt an incident meter mesure the light falling on a subject, whist a reflective meter measures the light returned (reflected) from the subject. The weston style meters are all (?) reflective type.

Strike that. The group test all appear to be incident meters. The weston ones I think aren't and the smartphone ones aren't. Either way, not spots.

I think we've just got confused regarding which meters we were all taking about, because everything in your post above, including the scored out section, is absolutely spot on. For clarity, I was referring to the Sekonic-type incident meters in my own posts. You're right about the smartphone meters and some of the other inexpensive handheld meters taking only reflective readings.

 

[steveo_mcg]

I think we've just got confused regarding which meters we were all taking about, because everything in your post above, including the scored out section, is absolutely spot on. For clarity, I was referring to the Sekonic-type incident meters in my own posts. You're right about the smartphone meters and some of the other inexpensive handheld meters taking only reflective readings.

Nothing like web based comms to cause confusion

 

[Andysnap]

This was posted by Dean (Strappy) in a thread started by Ariel.

http://expomat.tripod.com/

I've printed it out and I am going to test it this weekend against my Sekonic L208 Twinmate, coupled with the suggestions in the blog Ariel linked to it should make an interesting experiment.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I would argue that most of these meters are generally for incident metering. I haven't used the top-of-the-line Sekonics, so maybe they're different, but I've found the reflective capabilities of the meters I've used to be fairly restrictive, personally, as I can't tell for certain the area of the scene that the meter is viewing for the reflective measurement.

Nor can you on most hand held meters But that has never been a problem .

Most if not all modern Sekonic meters are basically Incident meters and most can measure flash and ambient light. but they can be used perfectly well for direct reflected light readings ( though few ever chose to do so as in most situations where you would use one, a reflected reading is second best. ( the same is true of the excellent minolta meters)
Mostly they are designed and used for studio work (flash or ambient or a mixture) or for cine photography where the greater accuracy and consistency of an incident reading is vital.
However even the modern seconic L-398 ambient only meter that I use, change hands for over £100.
All these Incident meters are aimed at the professional of serious amateur studio photographers who understand and need both the accuracy and functions they provide.
Their high price is more down to the less than mass market they are serving.

the cheapest is the little Sekonic 308 aimed at the amateur market and sold in high numbers to enthusiasts. It is highly accurate but somewhat limited in its functions But like all Sekonics it hods its price second hand and is never discounted.

 

[steveo_mcg]

Thre is the argument, of course, that with the older gear the most accurate light meter in the world is pointless since your shutter speeds may not be. I'm relatively comfortable with my RB lenes but beyond that Sunny 11 is probably accurate enough.

 

[abdoujaparov]

I'm not sure why a smartphone meter would be any different than a handheld really? The app is just using the internal light meter that the phones' camera uses to expose the image anyway so it's as accurate as any digital camera.

That depends on whether the manufacturer's OS implementation provides the data to the application. My cheapo Huawei Android phone doesn't - Light Meter reports that the camera is returning NULLs for some fields, so it won't work in reflective "front camera" mode. It will work in incident mode, but it's using the light sensor that's there to regulate the screen brightness, which can't be very accurate.

 

[stevelmx5]

The review confirms that the quality of the results is determined by the phone quality itself"

I agree that the app quality will be dependant on the physical hardware and OS limitations. I haven't used an Android phone for a while but know that the Iphone5 I use now meters well enough for Velvia 50 so that's close enough for me :0)

 

[Mr Bump]

That depends on whether the manufacturer's OS implementation provides the data to the application. My cheapo Huawei Android phone doesn't - Light Meter reports that the camera is returning NULLs for some fields, so it won't work in reflective "front camera" mode. It will work in incident mode, but it's using the light sensor that's there to regulate the screen brightness, which can't be very accurate.

Thats exactly how mu crappoid phone does it which is +/- 17 stops

 

[skysh4rk]

Thre is the argument, of course, that with the older gear the most accurate light meter in the world is pointless since your shutter speeds may not be. I'm relatively comfortable with my RB lenes but beyond that Sunny 11 is probably accurate enough.

Agree with this completely and it's why I often don't use slide film in my mechanical cameras. My SQ-A has an electromagnetic shutter and results suggest that its shutter speeds are accurate.

I use sunny 11 for those fleeting moments where I don't have time to take a meter reading and the scene is quickly changing, such as this weekend when we encountered a fold of highland cows in the road or when photographing spontaneous social or sporting moments.

 

[ozanan]

This was posted by Dean (Strappy) in a thread started by Ariel.

http://expomat.tripod.com/

I've printed it out and I am going to test it this weekend against my Sekonic L208 Twinmate, coupled with the suggestions in the blog Ariel linked to it should make an interesting experiment.

I've tried one of these and was surprised that I got pretty much the same readings on the Gossen Lunasix 3 I also use.
There's a couple of versions of them found here as well. Best thing about them - works for me, second best thing - cheaper than chips.

 

[Andysnap]

I have spoken to our tool troom manager today and given him a copy of the exposure mat to see if his guys can fashion a more robust version out of ....well who knows... We'll have to wait and see.

 

[NickT]

Perhaps we're all agonising about it too much and should just use Weegee's approach to technique, which was "f/8 and be there".

 

[Jao]

I couldn't agree more. A good light meter puts you in control. They are very easy to use with very little practice. They don't get fooled like an in camera meter does if your camera even has one.

I have been using a Sekonic L-358 and L-658 for years and would be lost without them. I bought them new and didn't upgrade for the newer ones when they came out since I didn't feel I would gain anything for my purposes. They are just as helpful with digital as with film.

Edit: I called my favorite meter a L-658 when it is a L-558 R. I have been calling it a L-658 for years. I guess the years are catching up.

Check out Joe Brady, he knows his stuff.

Don't worry that he is talking about digital, it works the same.

http://www.sekonic.com/classroom/webinars/mastering-exposure-for-landscape-photography-part-ii.aspx

What Ron and RJ said!

A decent incident meter will pay for itself in maximising properly exposed shots and not wasting film, developer and most of all time!