Recommendations for a Spot Meter?

[Guest mc_k]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would like to get a 1-deg. spot meter (new, not used). Looks like the choices are a Gossen Starlite, Sekonic, or Kenko, starting about US $500. Have I overlooked other choices? Thanks.

[lars_bergquist]

What in the world would you use a spot meter for? You need an incident meter -- and the knowledge about process (and basic physics) that Ansel and Edward lacked.

 

The old man from the Age Before Meters

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Hodc]

Minolta F has a 1 degree spot meter.

Worked fine for me in a calibrated proces with zone-metering and B&W film.

But you have to be very accurate and i was to a limited extend.

In digital its another story.

 

Harry

[tobey bilek]

Pentax digital spot meter if still available. It was the only one I could see the readout in the viewfinder when I got it. When you take 2 or 8 readings of a scene, it is a PITA to keep having to pull it from your eye.

 

They all suffer from incorrect readings from anything other than middle grey subjects so there is a learning curve, pretty steep at that. Limitation built into all reflective meters.

 

I have steared many to incident meters and nobody ever complained. Sekonic Studio DeLux- no battery. Have had mine decades and I always get perfect exposures. Not perfect pictures, just exposures.

[wattsy]

What in the world would you use a spot meter for? You need an incident meter

 

Maybe the OP wants it for landscapes? Maybe the OP already has an incident meter?

 

It is a pretty straightforward question - maybe it would be more helpful to answer it directly rather than come out with the regular patronising (and rather boring) pearls of wisdom?

Edited July 7, 2010 by wattsy

[erl]

Using a spot meter is a bit like using a Leica. It needs skill, but rewards perseverance. IMHO superior to incident meters and generally more versatile, especially in extreme situations such as stage and theatrical work.

 

Note: working with any hand held meter is a 'slow' shoot if you need to meter every shot.

 

Effectiveness determined by your style and requirements. Good tools in skilled hands.

 

My instrument is a Minolta. Very happy, but don't use it much with my Leicas. Not necessary or practical for how I work.

[Pintpot]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Go for a Pentax if you can, should be able to pick one up second hand for about half the cost of a new meter if you wish to (I'm aware you would prefer new). I've had one for years - for my 5x4. They are good meters.

Once you get familiar with using one (yes Zone system) it's easy.

Tony:D

[msk2193]

I still use a late '70s Pentax spot meter that was modified by Zone VI and just last month re-calibrated by Richard Ritter. It allows me to meter a highlight or shadow area, dial in where I want that to fall within the zone system (now read as the histogram on the camera) and voila. Quick and accurate.

The link is to the same meter I just found on e-Bay.

[lars_bergquist]

Stage work is more or less the only situation when a spot meter comes in handy. But in that case, you use it just like any reflected light meter, i.e. to get a mid-tone value. You just don't want all that black space.

 

For the rest, I insist that nabbing the highlights is what you sometimes need, and what a reflected light meter cannot do. Nab a diffuse maximum highlight (and the incident meter's white dome furnishes you with just that) and you know both where the standard 18% midtone is, and how far down into the shadows you can go.

 

Metering a subject's absolute contrast range between the highest highlight and the shadiest shadow (which one? there are usually plenty to choose between) is relevant only if you are using a Leica with a 4x5" sheet film back, which I doubt is the case. As soon as we are using roll film in any form, all hope of adjusting each image's negative to suit one kind of paper, is gone. This problem was solved in the 1930's by the introduction of graded papers. This approch was supplemented by enlarging tricks -- burning-in and shading -- and even non-standard tricks such as flashing the paper. I used them all.

 

Given this, the only job for a hand meter is to prevent highlight blowout. And the incident meter does that better than any spot meter (and i have used spot meters, and rejected them as not worth the trouble) and that is why I use my Gossen meter when possible. I have preferred incident ever since I bought my first meter, a Gossen Sixtino sometime in 1958, as I remember.

 

With a M8 or M9 a test exposure and a look at the histogram tells you all you need to know, and quicker than with a spot meter.

 

The old man from the Age of the Weston Master

[jruffolo]

Hello,

I have a Gossen Starlite and have not had any problems with it; it has always worked out perfect for me when I use it either for spot or incident readings. I mainly use it when I do studio type work, but found it is nice to have the 1 degree spot available for things such as live performances / theater where blown highlights are critical. Admittedly I don't use the spot function often, but it is one of those things that is worth having just for those few times where you do need it; and having the spot integrated into the main meter makes things that much more convenient, for me at least. The Starlite 2 I believe has replaced the original Starlite, and offers some improvements in terms of accuracy, speed and has a redesigned selector ring that's easier to use. Based on my experience I can recommend them. I've also heard good many good things about the Sekonic L-758, though I don't have any real world experience with one but it would be worth taking into consideration as well.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Ditto the Pentax digital spotmeter. I also used the one from Zone VI -- now on "consignment" with my film M's and darkroom (also ZoneVI equipped) at my son's home in C--------a.

 

This is a great meter.

[40mm f/2]

Me too, the Pentax spotmeter. One can measure the dynamic range of a scene with a spotmeter but not with an incident meter.

[Guest mc_k]

What in the world would you use a spot meter for? You need an incident meter -- and the knowledge about process (and basic physics) that Ansel and Edward lacked.

 

The old man from the Age Before Meters

 

no worries...the three meters mentioned are all incident meters, too.

[Guest mc_k]

Thanks everyone for the useful information.

 

I am expecting the spot function will be useful every once in a while, indoors and out. I do shoot regularly under theatrical lighting on film/digital. But more than that, I am hoping to learn something from it, even if I don't absolutely need it.

[wparsonsgisnet]

It is very nice to stand 20' from the subject and get perfect skin luminance readings from the stage.

[jbl]

I initially purchased the Sekonic L-758DR, but found it too cumbersome to use in the field. My major complaint with it was that I had to turn the thing on, then meter, etc., etc. If I wanted a on switch, I wouldn't use a Leica :-). It did have some great features like being able to take multiple spot readings of a scene and then show it on the display and have it compute an average. That was cool, but I found the on/off button irritating, so I returned it and found a used Pentax Digital Spot Meter. I like it much better. It's very simple to use though it's a very basic, barebones spot meter. For me, that's exactly what I wanted.

 

I do think spot meters are quite useful if you're going to be doing zone system work or anything where you want to be able to place specific areas of the scene on specific levels of brightness. For black and white and for E-6, it's invaluable. For C-41, I never bothered.

 

-jbl

[erl]

It is very nice to stand 20' from the subject and get perfect skin luminance readings from the stage.

 

..... or any other luminance you may choose, but only with a spotmeter.

[erl]

Stage work is more or less the only situation when a spot meter comes in handy. But in that case, you use it just like any reflected light meter, i.e. to get a mid-tone value. You just don't want all that black space.

 

For the rest, I insist that nabbing the highlights is what you sometimes need, and what a reflected light meter cannot do. Nab a diffuse maximum highlight (and the incident meter's white dome furnishes you with just that) and you know both where the standard 18% midtone is, and how far down into the shadows you can go.

 

Metering a subject's absolute contrast range between the highest highlight and the shadiest shadow (which one? there are usually plenty to choose between) is relevant only if you are using a Leica with a 4x5" sheet film back, which I doubt is the case. As soon as we are using roll film in any form, all hope of adjusting each image's negative to suit one kind of paper, is gone. This problem was solved in the 1930's by the introduction of graded papers. This approch was supplemented by enlarging tricks -- burning-in and shading -- and even non-standard tricks such as flashing the paper. I used them all.

 

Given this, the only job for a hand meter is to prevent highlight blowout. And the incident meter does that better than any spot meter (and i have used spot meters, and rejected them as not worth the trouble) and that is why I use my Gossen meter when possible. I have preferred incident ever since I bought my first meter, a Gossen Sixtino sometime in 1958, as I remember.

 

With a M8 or M9 a test exposure and a look at the histogram tells you all you need to know, and quicker than with a spot meter.

 

The old man from the Age of the Weston Master

 

Lars, with respect, I need to differ in opinion here, (as one old fart to another).

 

I do a lot of stage work periodically and rarely use the spotmeter, only because time and practicality does not permit the use of any hand held meter. I'm talking lots of action and lighting changes here. Using the 'in camera' meter, with practiced knowledge of its sensitivity is the only practical technique IMHO.

 

Where I do/did use the spotmeter a lot was in the studio shooting transparency film (remember that stuff?). Then, and only then, was I able to reliably meter exactly the range I needed to shoot without bracketing. It also required that I process my own films to guarantee consistency.

 

Lars, I don't understand your comment about reflected meters NOT nabbing highlights. That is precisely what a good spotmeter (reflected lightmeter) does better than any other. It is the reason I chose to work with one in the first place. The failure of incident meters is that they must be exposed to the same light you are shooting, and that is often not physically possible.

 

I went through about five Weston Master V's (& a Master 1V) and gave up because of their innate fragility, implicity in the moving coil mechanism. Then I tried a Sekonic Brockway, still moving coil but somehow more robust. Unfortunately, it got stolen. My earliest hand light meter was from about 1954, a Gossen Sixton, which I think was the predecessor to your Sixtino, but I may be wrong on that. I actually bought it from the grandfather of one my current dealers!

 

Your observation on the M8/9's useage is 'spot' on (pun intended).

 

Interestingly, we have both come from the same 'position' many moons ago, just by different paths. The destination seems to be coinciding.

"The other old man from the Weston Master V era"

[sm23221]

I've considered a spot meter too but concluded it is far more accurate and easier to just bracket your exposures. I often look at the suggested exposure when set to "A" and adjust using an estimate of the perceived tonal value. With some practice it becomes fairly easy to guess the correct exposure and takes much less time than using a spot meter.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[erl]

I've considered a spot meter too but concluded it is far more accurate and easier to just bracket your exposures. I often look at the suggested exposure when set to "A" and adjust using an estimate of the perceived tonal value. With some practice it becomes fairly easy to guess the correct exposure and takes much less time than using a spot meter.

 

Easier, maybe when possible to take more than one shot. More accurate? Never! There is is nothing that says any of your, let's say 3 shots of as bracket, will be accurate. Conceivably they could all be NOT optimum. It is partly that result that drove me to use a spotmeter in the the situations that I did. Mainly studio stuff where I had absolute control over lights. The spotmeter beat all other options for accurate exposure. All of this must allow the time to execute of course. Rapidly changing environments demand another approach.