Best in camera meter?

[Markok765]

What do you think the best in camera meter is? Which camera?

 

[Bob-D659]

A Gosssen luna-xxx or a Weston Master V, either or both will fit inside my Linhof, but they don't seem to work well in the dark.
Otherwise Nikon's 60% center weighted system works really well, but like any built in metering system, they ALL have their downsides, and you will get burnt sometimes.

 

[Markok765]

I know. The Color matrix in my F5 didn't meter the center of someones face, on a kind of backlit photo, instead metering the outside of the face, because it was more even with the background.

 

[Chan Tran]

I tend to think that the F5 would have the best in camera meter but my own F5 in matrix would consitently underexpose if (which I do often) I shoot negative film.

 

[Markok765]

I tend to think that the F5 would have the best in camera meter but my own F5 in matrix would consitently underexpose if (which I do often) I shoot negative film.

Maybe you don't develop or print it to the correct time? If you shoot slides, and it is correct, it would indicate that something is wrong with your negative processing.

 

[bnstein]

the multi-spot meter in the olympus om4 was always touted as outstanding

 

[Anon Ymous]

the multi-spot meter in the olympus om4 was always touted as outstanding

And the question is...
Has anybody used the highlight/shadow functions of it? These where supposed to help you render white objects white and black ones black. Did it work well?

 

[Lee L]

And the question is...
Has anybody used the highlight/shadow functions of it? These where supposed to help you render white objects white and black ones black. Did it work well?

I shot a lot with a friend who used this function on his OM-3 routinely. He was smart enough to know exactly where this metering function was placing him relative to his film dynamics, and exposed accordingly. So yes, it was useful and worked well.

My answer to the OP's question would be this: The best "in camera" light meter is one that the operator knows well and understands. That makes the matrix metering functions less attractive to me, as they are making invisible choices made on unkown parameters (which of those two billion professional shots in the program is the camera trying to duplicate?) , leaving the photographer in doubt as to how to make adjustments to produce a preferred rendering. I'd prefer the spot metering capacity of those cameras and my brain.

I have, however, found from experience that on an average scene, Nikon's matrix metering can pretty much duplicate an incident reading. to within a small fraction of a stop.

Lee

 

[2F/2F]

What do you think the best in camera meter is? Which camera?

Any meter that can be turned off and/or removed, and which does not annoyingly protrude into the viewfinder, beep, flash, or otherwise hoot, holler, and carry on about your camera settings.

I find the Canon FD 12% meters to be about as good as it gets if you must use an in-camera meter. They are very unobtrusive, easy to ignore, and I love that it is "semi" spot (meaning that it ignores the edges of the frame entirely) and match needle, with shutter speed, EI, and EV controlling one needle, and aperture controlling the other. This is much more sensible to me than lining up one needle in the middle. They are close enough to a spot meter to decently place tones if you have the time, and far enough from a spot that if you just point that camera and go with what the meter sez, you will probably end up with a decent exposure. I have converted all of mine to run off of 675 hearing aid batteries, but quite honestly, I just rarely use them due to the way I tend to shoot with 35.

 

[Markok765]

the multi-spot meter in the olympus om4 was always touted as outstanding

The OM4 is more expensive than the Nikon F5 on KEH for same condition!

 

[Lee L]

The OM4 is more expensive than the Nikon F5 on KEH for same condition!

And the OM3 is twice (or more) the cost of the OM4. In some cases it's about rarity or other qualities in the camera.

Lee

 

[Ed Sukach]

I'll cast my vote for the Olympus OM4 metering system. Spot, Averaging, Spot averaging, and selection of 5%, 18% and 95% modes (incidentally, with TRUE off-the film flash control) .

I'd like to see a stand-alone meter with the same capabilities.

The most sophisticated meter they ever built a camera around.

 

[Chan Tran]

I went thru a lot of pain to determine that in fact the matrix metering in my F5 is 2/3 stop under for neg film. Shutter speed and aperture are fine. It slightly underexpose slides but makes for good pictures. In high contrast situation it keeps the highlight from washed out well with slides. With neg I need good shadow details, it's almost imposible to overexpose enough with neg.

 

[Markok765]

I went thru a lot of pain to determine that in fact the matrix metering in my F5 is 2/3 stop under for neg film. Shutter speed and aperture are fine. It slightly underexpose slides but makes for good pictures. In high contrast situation it keeps the highlight from washed out well with slides. With neg I need good shadow details, it's almost imposible to overexpose enough with neg.

Have you checked the exposure compensation setting?

 

[sbelyaev]

F6

 

[kristopher_lawrence]

The ttl meters of the recent Leicas are incredibly precise. I shoot Kodachrome all the time with my M6 and never had a bad exposed slide because of the camera, only because of the user, me.

Even with the unprecise cloth shutter Leica M cameras are really precise. I didn't though so at first when I saw that the metering area was reflected from the shutter to a cell. Ultimately I guess my father was right: Leica IS Leica.

Furthermore, I am lucky: the inside of my hand when metering gives me a zone 6 reading spot on. I compared it with my Sekonic meter...

Kris

 

[aparat]

I used to have a Minolta Maxxum 7. It had a honeycomb metering function that let you see exposure values for individual honeycomb segments - sort of like reading multiple spot values and displaying them all together in one honeycomb view. I thought this was not only ingenious, but also quite useful. These days, most modern SLRs have decent meters, especially in spot mode.

 

[Chan Tran]

Have you checked the exposure compensation setting?

Yup! In fact I have good exposures with the exposure compensation set at +0.7

 

[waynecrider]

Having read photography magazines up the wahzoo since I was in H.S., the Minolta Honeycomb was touted by many to be one of the finest metering systems available; Not my word, reviewers. I have also read of many F3 owners who preferred their cameras metering, although from what I gather there still needed to be human input. Of the cameras I have used, Canon, Nikkormat, AF Nikon, K mount Pentax, screwmount Pentax I like the Canon FD for it's 12% window, but then I know how to use. That really is the best metering system; Knowing how to use it. Let's call it cranalognium metering.

 

[benjiboy]

Having read photography magazines up the wahzoo since I was in H.S., the Minolta Honeycomb was touted by many to be one of the finest metering systems available; Not my word, reviewers. I have also read of many F3 owners who preferred their cameras metering, although from what I gather there still needed to be human input. Of the cameras I have used, Canon, Nikkormat, AF Nikon, K mount Pentax, screwmount Pentax I like the Canon FD for it's 12% window, but then I know how to use. That really is the best metering system; Knowing how to use it. Let's call it cranalognium metering.

I agree with Wayne, there are lots of very sophisticated TTL metering systems in cameras that will give correct exposure in most situations, but it's being so familiar with yours that you are able to recognise the situations that will fool it.

 

[John Koehrer]

So you bought an F5 & found that it can be fooled? :confused: Like anything else you need to be able to interpret the information it's giving you.

 

[Chan Tran]

So you bought an F5 & found that it can be fooled? :confused: Like anything else you need to be able to interpret the information it's giving you.

it's not being fooled! It's simple under by 2/3 stop. I really hate that.

 

[2F/2F]

it's not being fooled! It's simple under by 2/3 stop. I really hate that.

No reflected light meter gives you a "correct" exposure. That would be literally impossible, as your correct exposure and my correct exposure of the same composition could be radically different. They are supposed to give you the information you need to make a correct exposure depending on your own vision and using your own technical skill. No matter how advanced your meter is, you will 100% of the time get a better exposure, if only slightly, for the print you want by going with something other than what it sez. A reflected meter followed to the T must be expected to be way wrong sometimes, a little wrong most of the time, and perhaps every now and then, spot on. A lot of the time, it will get you a neg that will allow you to make a decent print, but to expect it to always be "right" if you are going with exactly what it recommends is an exercise in futility.

 

[Thanasis]

I'd say the Nikon F5 as it has built in spot, adjustable centre-weighted and matrix meters. But they're not worth very much if you dont know what to do with them. Personally, I use a spot meter 99% of the time as it gives me the most amount of control even though it may be a little slower to use.

 

[nsouto]

Been trying hard to "break" the mattrix meter on my F6.
Haven't managed to do it yet.
But I still use the Pentax handheld spotmeter a lot!