Using A Weston Master V

[Stealth3kpl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A few years ago I bought a Weston Master V with the Invercone. It's in beautiful condition. I sent it off for refurbishment (photoelectric cell and calibration). It immediately sat in the drawer as I prefer to use my Sekonic 308. As my 308 has started playing up a little, I thought I'd dig it out to see how it compares. The invercone is large, and I've seen reference to holding a hand over the cone on dull days so that it is less affected by the sky. I note that some meters allow the cone to be partially covered for such conditions. Holding my hand above the invercone has shown me the reading can be altered by one or two stops depending on how close to the cone I hold my hand. I wonder how you use your Weston-type meter.

Pete

Edited December 2, 2018 by Stealth3kpl

[Advertisement]

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

[carbon_dragon]

Well, I recently noticed my Weston Master III had finally gone out of calibration. I used to use it by going very close to objects, or doing general pointing while trying to avoid any bright source of light like the sun or even the sky and then setting the meter that way. it works, and it wasn't really worse than a CDs meter used that way (like the sort I clip on to old cameras that don't have meters). BUT truth is, that spot meters are really easier to use if you really want to figure out how the shot is going to come out.

Sounds very basic I know, I'm not an expert. I started with a GE meter and compared to that, the Weston was a Rolls Royce. I went from there to a battered (and burned, not sure how that happened since I got it used) Gossen Luna Pro. Still have that meter. It even has a limited spot meter attachment. I love the way Weston's look.

[pedaes]

Never seen one where the 'cone can be partially covered, nor have I heard of the technique of covering with a hand. If you take an incident reading using the'cone, just take a straight reading. There is of course the built in baffle to use depending on overall light levels.

You might find this site interesting https://www.westonmeters.info

Edited December 2, 2018 by pedaes
+

[Stealth3kpl]

1 minute ago, pedaes said:

Never seen one where the 'cone can be partially covered, nor have I heard of the technique of covering with a hand. 

No, I hadn't, but I was researching spot meters and looking at videos about metering, and the first two videos I saw showed this technique. Now, I think the videos I watched both related to movie making, but of course, the principle should be the same. I'll see if I can find them.

Pete

[Stealth3kpl]

"Toplight" affects incident readings. It makes sense. See from 5.30 in this vid

Pete

 

[Stealth3kpl]

17 minutes ago, carbon_dragon said:

 BUT truth is, that spot meters are really easier to use if you really want to figure out how the shot is going to come out.

Yes, I was researching spot meters, but I'm just interested to learn about this meter at the moment.

Pete

[carbon_dragon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I could never find a III instruction manual, but I think I have a II manual around somewhere. It was close enough so that when I was trying to learn to use it, I could refer to it. I'm guessing these days there are probably manuals on the internet.

[gyoung]

I have a couple of working IVs, I prefer the dial to the V.  I boughty first IV in 1962 and have used them eversince.

I used the innvercone all the time in the studio, and copy stand etc.  Just take it to the subject and point it towards the camera,  I found it absolutely right for reversal, needed a half to one stop more for negative.

You could use it outdoors as long as you can get to the subject, so ok for portraiture and close stuff but I preferred to use it as a reflective meter outside.  Never heard of shading the top with your hand, surely defeats the purpose of the invercone? 

Gerry 

Edited December 5, 2018 by gyoung

[250swb]

For outdoors you are much better off removing the cone and taking reflective readings from something that reflects Zone V, which would be an 18% grey card, green grass, etc. I agree shading the cone with your hand is just a fudge, possibly to make the meter conform to what you think it should be reading, so why bother using a meter. 

[gyoung]

On 12/2/2018 at 6:26 PM, carbon_dragon said:

I could never find a III instruction manual, but I think I have a II manual around somewhere. It was close enough so that when I was trying to learn to use it, I could refer to it. I'm guessing these days there are probably manuals on the internet.

Afaik only difference between II and III was the use on the latter of ASA rather than Weston for film speeds.

Gerry 

[carbon_dragon]

Besides I kind of get a kick out of reading the manuals on old camera equipment. There is sometimes a goofy innocence about them, with happy 50s people using their cameras in photographs or illustrations.

[pico]

On 12/2/2018 at 12:26 PM, carbon_dragon said:

I could never find a III instruction manual, but I think I have a II manual around somewhere. It was close enough so that when I was trying to learn to use it, I could refer to it. I'm guessing these days there are probably manuals on the internet.

Weston changed their ASA ratings between two models so readings will differ. It might be interesting to have one of each model.

 

Edited December 6, 2018 by pico

[gyoung]

4 hours ago, pico said:

Weston changed their ASA ratings between two models so readings will differ. It might be interesting to have one of each model.

 

Weston had their own way of measuring film speed, a list came with the meter. Generally as far as I remember the Weston speed of a film was a little less than ASA. i e FP3 was 64 ASA but on Weston it was 40 or 50.

If set to the right sensitivity there was no other difference between II and II so readings should match, i e no difference in indicated exposure.  (Providing both are adjusted properly).

Later on ASA changed, speeds doubled 'to get rid of the safety factor',  which really meant that the exposed densities moved down the characteristic curve, to make more use of the threshold.  In practice if you wanted shadow detail you simply gave a bit more exposure! This was I think an early example of technical innovation being driven by a deluded publicity dept.

Gerry 

 

[gyoung]

1 hour ago, gyoung said:

Weston had their own way of measuring film speed, a list came with the meter. Generally as far as I remember the Weston speed of a film was a little less than ASA. i e FP3 was 64 ASA but on Weston it was 40 or 50.

If set to the right sensitivity there was no other difference between II and II so readings should match, i e no difference in indicated exposure.  (Providing both are adjusted properly).

Later on ASA changed, speeds doubled 'to get rid of the safety factor',  which really meant that the exposed densities moved down the characteristic curve, to make more use of the threshold.  In practice if you wanted shadow detail you simply gave a bit more exposure! This was I think an early example of technical innovation being driven by a deluded publicity dept.

Gerry 

 

Actually its the toe of the characteristic curve that's used,  not the threshold.  Old age brain fade and too late to edit the post!

Gerry 

[farnz]

I used my trusty Weston V for many years with reversal film for landscape work until the V permanently liberated itself over the edge of a precipice on a particularly wet and windy evening.  I moved to a Pentax Spotmeter after that as the nature of my work was changing.  I found the Weston V to be an excellent reflective meter, I hadn't heard of partially covering the invercone, and I can't see the benefit - merely detriment in my opinion.

Pete.

[erl]

47 minutes ago, farnz said:

I used my trusty Weston V for many years with reversal film for landscape work until the V permanently liberated itself over the edge of a precipice on a particularly wet and windy evening.

Pete.

Whew! Clearly you were not wearing the neck strap or you may have gone with it! 😨

Such good fortune has kept you with us. Cheap at half the price.

[farnz]

5 hours ago, erl said:

Whew! Clearly you were not wearing the neck strap or you may have gone with it! 😨

No, you're right I wasn't wearing the neck strap that day because fishing it out of my wet weather clothing proved cumbersome and meant unzipping and offering the horizontal Scottish rain access to places I'd rather it didn't go, so had it in a front jacket pocket for ease of access.  It seems there are some lessons you (I) have to learn the hard way ... 🙁😅

Pete.