light meters and M8 (M9 too ?)

[Michael Geschlecht]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello Tobey,

 

Only the next word but: Isn't your F5.6 @ between 1000 & 2000 @ ISO160 more or less pretty close to Bill's favorite F16 & 1/ISO ?

 

Especially if we make that 160 into the 200 Jaap has been known to suggest.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[Advertisement]

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

[pgk]

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.

Its not about having the last word. Its about reality of the situation. Handheld meters have their place but are far more useful under controlled lighting conditions than in the field with digital capture. They are 'old' technology and give far less information than the histogram - especially a histogram based on a small portion of the image - even one derived from an in-camera jpeg.

 

Learning to interpret the histogram and use it to best advantage is a new skill and it really makes things easier and exposures more accurate if you do so. In high contrast scenes exposure is always a trade off between loss of highlights and blocked shadows and determining the 'optimum exposure is a matter of viewing and understanding the histogram and experience will allow a judgement to be made as to where to pitch the exposure and even what if any highlight data will be recoverable as well as just how much shadow detail can be retained.

 

In low contrast scenes (which I am all too familiar with as I shoot a lot of underwater material) exposure to the right has its place but in my experience doesn't always produce quite as good a file as pitching the exposure more centrally on the histogram (no-one makes housing for incident light meter any more so exposure has to be determined from in-built meter and histogram) but this is in cases where the contrast fits well within the sensor's recording capabilities.

 

Questions about light meters crop up here from time to time and there are exponents who find them great. Fine, but they simply don't provide as much information as even a jpeg derived histogram and to do so would require the intelligent use of a spotmeter which is rarely discussed.

 

As a last note, the M system seems to me to be a 'back to basics' simplistic way of photography, so why carry another piece of (superfluous) gear?

[tobey bilek]

Last word is printed so will add no more except try for yourself. I turned a lot of people on to it and then they tell me how well it works.

 

I have not figured if if is sunny 16 for Leica or not, but sunny 16 works with my 5 digital Nikons including the pro bodies. With the M8, I chimped a few exposures in common light conditions and commited to memory. Darks end up just inside the right edge. None of Nikons consistently get as good a result as sunny 16 specially in cloudy overcast.

 

The in camera meter is quick and dirty and I try to find a mid tone to meter. The Leica is difficult because it is a strip across the center, but center weighted. The M6 has a nicely defined circle and that worked well if you pointed it correctly.

 

Overcast & cloudy remain difficult as they want to overexpose and blow the sky. For Nikon, I put on spot meter mode and meter the brightest spot in the sky, then give a stop more than that. Or meter the sky bright spot, then the foreground, and split the difference. This will match an incident meter reading very closely.

 

When you can not get the incident into the proper light for a reading, I can use a Pentax Digital Spotmeter. This meter is a lifesaver. I know where to point it and how much to compensate depending on color. This one is a hold over from film. All the large format guys use them along with calibrated shutters and film checked for speed batch by batch.

 

If you wish to chimp and correct, be my guest . I find it a waste of shutter actuations. and frequently there is no time for it.