jamalsan Posted November 3, 2011 Share #1 Posted November 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi everyone, I'm not skilled enough to rely on my judgement alone when I take a picture. So most of the time, I trust my camera. Time and again I use an external light meter to measure light and choose the appropriate shutter speed. As I was outdoor with my daughter, I decided to do both, that is take pictures trusting my camera and using my light meter, a Gossen Digisix, just to compare. The problem is I'm not happy with the results of both devices. I find the pictures of the M8 too bright and the ones taken with the Gossen Digisix too dark. The truth is probably somewhere in between. First outdoor : L1020759 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Here f:4, 1/125 (M8 A mode) L1020761 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Here f:4, 1/350 (Gossen Digisix) Then indoors : L1020044 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! f:2.8, 1/30 (M8 A mode) L1020045 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! f:2.8, 1/60 (Gossen Digisix) I must specify here that the M8 is closer to reality than the Digisix, be it indoor or outdoor. Clearly the Digisix indications are wrong, but I'm not satisfied with the M8 either. Would you have any advice ? I had already noticed under exposition on film, when using the Digisix but overall it was ok. I use the Gossen to get reflected light measure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 Hi jamalsan, Take a look here light meters and M8 (M9 too ?). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Stateowned Posted November 3, 2011 Share #2 Posted November 3, 2011 maybe the way that you are measuring it with the digisix are wrong.. what is it that you dont like by the pictures? i think you should try a stationairy object and use all the different metering modes you can find on both devices and see which results suit your expectations the best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peekpt Posted November 4, 2011 Share #3 Posted November 4, 2011 is it because of the sensor crop factor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Murray-White Posted November 4, 2011 Share #4 Posted November 4, 2011 Interesting I got my Gossen Vario Six out, took a reading, picked up the M8 took a reading from it, both said the same thing....................but then I remembered I'd previously stopped the M8 down 2/3 which, to my eye agrees with your results, if I thought I had a problem I'd try to take my reading from something that was as close to mid grey (or a colour that is the equivalent to mid grey) - in reality with a digital camera you can take a quick snap look at it and then adjust to suit your taste, taking into account that the screen is a little off too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamalsan Posted November 4, 2011 Author Share #5 Posted November 4, 2011 I was doubting I misused the Digisix, as someone suggested, so I've checked several times the manual : http://www.gossen-photo.de/pdf/ba_digisix_gb.pdf The method I use with the Digisix is the reflected light measurement method. I'm doing everything the manual advocates : I shift the diffuser to the right position and of course I see to it that the light measuring aperture of the Digisix is not obstructed by my fingers or my hand or whatever. Then I aim at the object or people I want to photograph, press the button, read the value and set the camera accordingly. With this method everything I shoot is underexpose, too dark. So this morning I've tried not to shift the diffuser to the right position. Instead I've shifted it to the left position, but I kept using the reflected light method measurement. Normally, if the diffuser is shifted to the left, one ought to use the incident light method, measuring from the subject to the camera. But I've decided to keep on measuring from the camera to the subject... Much to my surprise, the indication suggested by the Digisix perfectly matches the M8 A mode measurement ! I don't understand that, but it's okay, I'll follow this method. Maybe the Digisix isn't properly calibrated, maybe I'm doing something wrong, I really don't know. However, I find the M8 overexposes a little. It maybe due to the AWB...or maybe is it my eyes !!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pr28893 Posted November 4, 2011 Share #6 Posted November 4, 2011 Why not use the incident light leading? This would normally be more accurate than a reflected light reading.Certainly with the subjects you showed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamalsan Posted November 4, 2011 Author Share #7 Posted November 4, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Indeed, I think that is what I'll be doing from now on -at least regarding portraits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted November 4, 2011 Share #8 Posted November 4, 2011 Both the M8 and M9 have histograms which will show you the tonal spread (admittedly from the jpeg created from your image however.....) within the image. This will give you far more and far more useful information than either the camera meter or the handheld meter, and is far faster. Simply take a shot and then check the histogram, re-set to place the brightest area where you want it to be and keep shooting. Digital cameras don't work in the same way as film cameras as regards their metering requirements and an averaging meter is about as effective as it was with film (ie. not very). Using the hand held or incident meter relies on an understanding of the way that you want to work in conjunction with the digital sensor and is useful in controlled lighting environments but not as helpful as the histogram when the lighting is not controllable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 6, 2011 Share #9 Posted November 6, 2011 Some things to consider that may have contributed to the variation you found in results from the Digisix and the M8's meter: (I apologise if it sounds patronising, it's not meant to be) 1. The base ISO of the M8 is ISO 160, not ISO 100; are you sure your Digisix was set to the correct ISO? 2. Are you certain that your M8 is not set to AutoISO, which could cause the readings to vary? 3. The M8 measures exposure in as oval centre-weighted pattern. I notice that your two daylight shots have slightly different framing and the area where the M8 would read exposure from contains the black jacket, white sleeves, and purple shoulder. A slight framing movement could cause a substantial change in exposure reading owing to the differences in tone and reflectance of materials in the metering zone. Similar for the indoor shots where the black body of the M3 and the white background sheet will give significantly different readings. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 6, 2011 Share #10 Posted November 6, 2011 Not only is the base ISO 160, compared to film it is equivalent to ISO 200 which should be your setting on an exposure meter. Additionally, since time immemorial, one has always needed to shoot in the settings of the exposure meter to the film/sensor. External influences ranging from personal taste and subject matter to lens used and developer choice have always made an ISO value a non-absolute parameter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamalsan Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share #11 Posted November 8, 2011 @farn (Pete) : I set the Digisix settings to 160 ISO but I don't remember the white balance settings, actually. Like lost M8 owners I'm not satisfied with it, so generally I set some Kelvin value (around 6000 K) and shoot. I seldom use AWB. @jaapv : I really had no idea M8 ISO 160 was equivalent to ISO 200 as far as film is concerned...the Digisix allows you to select ISO 160, so I never questioned that. Is it something Leica warned us about or did you found that based on your own experience ? I'll do the test again, but I remember using the M3 with a 200 ISO Fuji Film and found the pictures to be underexposed too, as I mentionned above. But the way I use the Digisix now is okay (haven't tried it on film though). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted November 12, 2011 Share #12 Posted November 12, 2011 External light meters, especially non spot reflected meters are difficult to use at best. If a subject has extremely bright highlights and extremely black shadows the reading can be the same as a subject with all mid grays. The mid gray scene will work, the high contrast scene will require more thought to avoid blown highlights and black shadows. Now lets look at a your scene with the girl on her bike (cute picture), assuming it is calibrated correctly, your Gossen is picking up sky brightness and reducing exposure. It does not seeing her face or vest which are darker. In order to get correct exposure on her face you need to meter off her face by moving very close to your subject, this is why spot meters are so well loved, you know what you're metering, there is no doubt as to what is read and not read. Now generalize this to your camera/sheet picture. So, just move in closer. If your meter still underexposes, then calibrate your meter by lowering the iso. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jevidon Posted January 12, 2012 Share #13 Posted January 12, 2012 When I got my M8 a few years back, I found that it over exposed to a small degree. Then I started checking this forum and found that many of the forum people set their M8's to a default -1/3 or a - 2/3 EV in the set menu. I've used a -1/3 EV ever since and have been generally satisfied with the results. It depends a lot on the scene whether you use -1/3 or more, but the default 0 EV definitely over exposes. Edit to original posting: I just checked the M8 at 0EV, -1/3 EV, and -2/3 EV and compared the readings with my Gossen Digisix, my Nikon D300 and my Panasonic GF1 all set at the default ISO using my computer screen wallpaper as a target. That gave me a uniform corner to corner brightness level. The M8 set at -1/3 EV agreed with the Nikon D300 and the GF1, but disagreed with the Digisix . I must conclude, therefore, that the light meter is off on it's readings. BTW, as predicted, when I tested the M8 at 0 EV it was, predictably, over exposing a little. So you can set your M8 at -1/3 EV and you should be right on target, but experiment a little since even Leicas may vary from unit to unit, but I doubt it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 12, 2012 Share #14 Posted January 12, 2012 It has been determined a long time ago that for best results the M8 ISO 160 setting should be considered 200 on external gear like exposure meters and flashes, 800 for 640 etc. Canon for instance has a different bias. It all has to do with the basic incompatablity of the digital and film ISO definitions. I won't bother everybody with ISO sheets again, but in the end it boils down that a manufacturer has a considerable leeway in defining the ISO to achieve a "comparable exposure"to the real ISO values of film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MA-Sweden Posted January 17, 2012 Share #15 Posted January 17, 2012 Hi, Something to read for everybody: Sekonic Classroom - What Is a Histogram? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 17, 2012 Share #16 Posted January 17, 2012 Sekonic state: "Histograms are not typically helpful in determining the exact exposure of the subject, the effect of lighting on the subject, or variations in light mixtures. And as histograms appear on a small screen on the back of your digital camera, a quick glance is often not enough to make a quality determination." Their problem is that often digital exposure is about determining where your highlights should be placed in order to retain as much shadow detail as possible without losing highlight detail. And this varies from camera to camera (for example I find that the M8 shadows are surprisingly more tolerant of being lifted than my 5D2 probably due to the lack of banding/artifacts in the M8 shadows). Using a hand held meter to work out precise highlight placement is no easier (and potentially more difficult) than using a small lcd histogram - especially when the M8 allows a zoomed in review with a histogram of the visible area. So whilst a hand held meter is very useful for controlled lighting situations it is not always so helpful in many others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 17, 2012 Share #17 Posted January 17, 2012 Reflection light meters are always wrong unless you show them a grey object of proper reflectivity. That or you get good at compensating for yellow, summer grass, spring grass, reds and violets, snow. I use the notch between 1000 & 2000 and 5.6 with ISO 160. That gives me well exposed photos in sun. An incident meter ( with the white dome ) is best if you can get it into the same light as the subject, distance does not matter. These are used on movie sets because they can not bracket and can not reshoot. Flash meters for studio photogs are all this type, same reason. A reflection meter will never work without proper interpretation of the reading, ie overexpose light subject, under expose dark, BASED ON THE READING ONLY. THE PIC COMES OUT EXPOSED PROPERLY. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 17, 2012 Share #18 Posted January 17, 2012 A reflection meter will never work without proper interpretation of the reading, ie overexpose light subject, under expose dark, BASED ON THE READING ONLY. THE PIC COMES OUT EXPOSED PROPERLY. Yes, BUT... It depends what you define as 'correct' or 'proper' exposure. If you are shooting RAW files and want to ensure that you have as much shadow data as possible in a high contrast scene, then biasing the exposure to the right and just retaining highlight detail requires a great deal more information than just a single meter reading - or requires a pre-shot and exposure adjustment based on the histogram which is much easier. For a low contrast scene a simpler reading is acceptable because neither highlight nor shadow detail will be lost, although it can be argued that biasing right may still yield a more versatile RAW file (in my experience this is not as true as some would suggest). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted January 17, 2012 Share #19 Posted January 17, 2012 I resurrected my old Gossen VarioSix F meter, still with its battery working, and found fairly precise correlation between my M-digitals and their meters. I ALWAYS use that meter in its incident metering mode, both for flash and ambient light. Apart from the convenience factor of in-built meters, I do enjoy using the hand-held meter where time and situation are favourable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 17, 2012 Share #20 Posted January 17, 2012 There are knowledgeable people who can make a case ETTR is not necessarily best. for one thing, how do you judge? Certainly not by the little histo on the camera. Second, sunlighted and other common subjects require the whole range of the histo which means you must be dead accurate and moving to the right, overexposing, risks blown highlights which can not be recovered. Learn to get the exposure right by metering or experience and do not rely on chimping and bracketing. That means learn your equipment. Someone else may have the last word. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.