Why meterless cameras are important to photography

[kivis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an M-A, M3 and a Nikon F (no meter). Why I deem them so important? Because using them teaches how to setup your metering by feel (you will get better at this over time), It teaches you in the beginning to guess exposure but you will get better at this with time, too. I can look at the top of my camera before composing and set the aperture, Shutter speed and even the focus before I even compose. Then I bring the camera up to my eye to compose the shot. Mostly use a 35mm lens. A very pleasurable experience.

I do "cheat" sometimes if I really am clueless about an exposure, I will whip out my iPhone to use an app called light meter.

[Advertisement]

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

[kivis]

[evikne]

Fully agree! Although I have a light meter on my camera, I never use it and just ignore it. It's actually very liberating not to be dependent on the camera's suggestions in any way (no worries about exposure compensation or how the camera is going to meter the light).

Edited June 11, 2023 by evikne

[250swb]

Personally I think the way to learn meterless guessing is to use a meter. After a while, maybe a few years and if you paid attention, you’ll equate a type and intensity of light with what you’ve read on the meter. I can look out of the window now and give a good enough estimation of speed and f/stop. But you can’t learn guesswork from using guesswork, it’s a waste of film, and time, and learned knowledge.

[kivis]

Good point

[spydrxx]

I found going from the pictures suggesting exposure on a film box to (when I could afford it) using a meter and finally after a few years, often dispensing with the meter, because I had a pretty good comprehension of lighting conditions relevant to the sunny 16 suggestions. I still periodically check my guess against a meter reading (most often incident).

[AZD]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just my two cents on the matter… I think the question is less about whether cameras without meters are more/less important, or offer some special quality, or whatever the case may be. Instead, it seems like a question of how to best utilize the many excellent cameras which have no meter.

Since color and black and white print film offer enough latitude to be quite forgiving, it’s reasonably easy to expose correctly using established experience. This is a skill I believe every photographer could benefit from. Last October I arrived in Rome only to find I had forgotten my meter. Fortunately I had a few common exposures memorized. Very few frames (using an M3 and Kentmere 100) were over/under exposed. Most were very good, and like you I enjoyed the relative simplicity and freedom offered by such a basic camera. Shoot first and sort it out in the darkroom.

However, my recent return to Ektachrome, having last used it around 20 years ago, has made clear how important getting the exact exposure is with E100. Since I don’t scan (yes, there will be Coke and mixed nuts with the slide show) there’s no correction after clicking the shutter. For now I’m using a Nikon FE2, meter and all. Despite having aperture priority, the FE2 is among the best “manual” cameras around as its meter display tells you both selected and suggested shutter speeds, effectively showing the difference between the two. After a few rolls I can begin to anticipate the correct exposure. Once I get that sorted out, the M3 and its mostly stepless shutter should do just as well.

Sorry, rambling response… In the end I find that using a meter helps me acquire the skill of reading light, so that working quickly with a rugged, reliable manual camera is possible.

 

[kivis]

What B/W film (400 iso) offers the most exposure latitude, I wonder?

[kivis]

BTW I am not saying meterless cameras are better or even necessary. My point is that if one really wants to learn the basics of exposure, I think a meterless camera forces you to learn it which IMHO is important to being an accomplished photographer. Of course one could train themselves to accomplish the same knowledge with other cameras, film or digital but then you have to force yourself to ignore all the "goodies" in that camera.

[hepcat]

3 hours ago, kivis said:

I have an M-A, M3 and a Nikon F (no meter). Why I deem them so important? Because using them teaches how to setup your metering by feel (you will get better at this over time), It teaches you in the beginning to guess exposure but you will get better at this with time, too.

To be a little contrary, whether or not your camera has a meter is largely irrelevant.  Like the camera body and lens itself, it's merely another tool.  Whether you choose to use it or not is up to you.   Just because its there and functional doesn't mean the camera won't work without it. 

What I find fascinating is how many "photographers" are essentially clueless at what a light meter actually does, how it works, or how it can be beneficial.  There is little understanding of the principles involved, and a blind reliance on whatever the meter says without comprehension of what the meter reading actually means.   The corollary that using the meter WITH that understanding can help you place what tones you want to be "medium gray" in b&w, and helps with contrast in color and can help you retain detail in shadows without blowing highlights.

A meter isn't essential to make an image, but if the concepts are understood, it's use most definitely desirable in making the best image possible. 

Edited June 11, 2023 by hepcat

[AZD]

24 minutes ago, kivis said:

BTW I am not saying meterless cameras are better or even necessary. My point is that if one really wants to learn the basics of exposure, I think a meterless camera forces you to learn it which IMHO is important to being an accomplished photographer.

I hear ya. Understanding light is essential regardless of the camera, film or digital. The number of ways to take a bad photograph with either are endless. It all comes down to lighting and subject. 

31 minutes ago, kivis said:

What B/W film (400 iso) offers the most exposure latitude, I wonder?

For me, HP5. It’s nearly impossible to mess up completely. I have found that if you somehow end up with exposures that are all over the place, you can develop longer to salvage the underexposed frames without destroying the overexposed ones, though with the penalty of increased grain, density, and contrast. I haven’t tortured other films quite so much. 

[105012]

Printing in a darkroom is an excellent way to refine this learning further, you will soon come to understand the effect of varying densities on your result… on the other hand, scanning tends to lessen this learning due to automatic exposure correction by the software…

[AZD]

4 minutes ago, 105012 said:

Printing in a darkroom is an excellent way to refine this learning further, you will soon come to understand the effect of varying densities on your result… on the other hand, scanning tends to lessen this learning due to automatic exposure correction by the software…

This is very true. I can’t speak to digital scanning, but printing will teach and encourage you to refine both exposure and processing. While the incredible latitude of film allows us to be flexible in our exposure, printing those negatives is another matter. Some require almost no effort, while others can be very frustrating. I have many of the latter to provide the encouragement  

Still, a well exposed photograph of a boring subject is far less compelling than a poorly exposed photo of an interesting subject… but a well exposed photo of an interesting subject can be almost magical on paper. 

[Anbaric]

There's something to be said for having at least one meterless camera, because it forces you to acquire the skill of reading the light, which can be useful in other situations. When you can do this, it's easier to tell if you've set the ISO wrong on your metered camera, or if there's some fault, or if the meter is being fooled by tricky lighting. And of course there are a lot of older cameras that are rewarding to shoot with, including a bunch of vintage Leicas, where being able to read the light makes your life a lot easier (it's irritating to use a separate meter with every shot). After a while, when you return to the metered camera you'll find that you can second guess the meter pretty accurately in many conditions. But in the end, if I could keep only one camera I'd choose one with a meter in it - there's a good reason they were invented, and generally they make things quicker and your exposures more accurate, especially in dimmer light.

[hepcat]

11 minutes ago, Anbaric said:

 or if the meter is being fooled by tricky lighting.

Herein lies the problem.  The meter is never "fooled."  It tells you that whatever light value you point it at is "medium" 18% gray, or Zone V.   If you point it at a bright light (Zone X,) it'll tell you how to expose THAT as "medium gray."  If you point it at a black cat in a coal bin (Zone I,) it will tell you how to expose THAT to be medium gray (Zone V.)  YOU control what tone should be metered as "medium gray" by pointing the meter at the tone you want so represented.   The more complex and computerized the meter is, the deeper the understanding the photographer must have to understand what it's doing in order to use it properly.  

Hence my comment above that most photographers don't understand exactly what the meter does, or what the meter reading means, or how to use it properly.   

[Ouroboros]

1 hour ago, kivis said:

What B/W film (400 iso) offers the most exposure latitude, I wonder?

What makes you think any iso 400 film is actually iso 400?

[pippy]

What Hepcat has said twice-over.

Philip.

[Anbaric]

48 minutes ago, hepcat said:

Herein lies the problem.  The meter is never "fooled."  It tells you that whatever light value you point it at is "medium" 18% gray, or Zone V.   If you point it at a bright light (Zone X,) it'll tell you how to expose THAT as "medium gray."  If you point it at a black cat in a coal bin (Zone I,) it will tell you how to expose THAT to be medium gray (Zone V.)  YOU control what tone should be metered as "medium gray" by pointing the meter at the tone you want so represented.   The more complex and computerized the meter is, the deeper the understanding the photographer must have to understand what it's doing in order to use it properly.

The simple meter in my M6 (or my Nikon FM) is predictable, and I know what I have to point it at to get what I want. It isn't that straightforward for matrix (evaluative) meters. The meters in my digital cameras, or even in late model film cameras like my F100 or F5, are doing much more complex things in matrix mode like matching data from many sensors against a large database of representative patterns for which 'correct' exposures have been determined. The photographer can't hope to understand what is going on unless they switch back to a centre-weighted or spot mode. Most of the time these clever meters get it 'right', which is great if you're working in a fast moving situation with no time to think like Ansel Adams, but sometimes not. I've learnt to recognise some of the things that 'fool' the matrix meter of the X100T I carry most of the time - if it were a film camera I'd be better off switching to a simpler mode in these situations, but as it has an EVF I can adjust the exposure visually with the compensation dial. But this is a bit outside the scope of the film M forum! I don't think even the Hexar RF has a matrix meter.

Edited June 11, 2023 by Anbaric

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IkarusJohn]

I used to use a Gossen 1° spot meter. It was far cleverer than me, allocating I to X and doing all the calculations for me.  I then found that the latitude with black and white film is such that an incident reading is just fine most of the time. With the bellows rangefinders we had as children, the film was Kodak pan-x ASA 125.  My father stuck some Leukoplast surgical tape on the back with the instruction - shutter 1/125, & f/16 for sunny etc.

I’m working on re-establishing my instinctive aperture setting after being dumbed down by computerised cameras. These day, I try to include an estimate of depth of field.

[jakontil]

6 hours ago, kivis said:

What B/W film (400 iso) offers the most exposure latitude, I wonder?

Probably plenty out there and one of them is Ilford HP5+ developed in ilfotec HC in my case

When i meter with eyes, it’s trained to see the shadows exposure, that’s my starting point, try not to be fooled by meter in camera when shooting backlight 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!