TheFlyingCamera
Membership Council
If your need is for something pocketable, the L308. If you need something that can do the spot as well as incident and reflected, and you need something a bit more rugged, the 408.
Thanks for the tip onto the Gossen DigiPro F. I'm pretty sure I've narrowed my choices down to the Sekonic L-408, L-308S, and the Gossen DigiPro F. Considering these are all in my budget, which one do you guys feel would be the best bang for the buck?
Also, as an engineer, I wouldn't mind coming up with a little light meter that accounts for reciprocityit actually wouldn't be too difficult, you could perform a curve-fitting analysis on each films reciprocity curve, and then use the function to interpolate and convert the metered readings through the function, and output the accounted-for exposure
If your need is for something pocketable, the L308. If you need something that can do the spot as well as incident and reflected, and you need something a bit more rugged, the 408.
As far as the Digisix, I see it only can meter down to about a 4 second exposure. I would prefer a meter that can calculate slower than this.
I've had one for about two and a half years Scott, and although I also have a Sekonic-L358 and a Kenko KFM 2010 (Minolta Flash meter V1) The Gossen Digi pro is my go to meter for every day use, because it's so pocket-able robust, quick and easy to use, and the case fits onto your'e pants belt.I've never used the Gossen, so I have no opinion about it. My only concern would be the way the light-reading dome sticks out - it looks to me as if it has the potential to break off more easily because it pivots 180 degrees and swivels 360 degrees. I'll leave owners of that meter to comment on the durability/fragility of that component. Otherwise, it looks like a very competent, easy to use meter.
I have a pedantic itch that I must scrape a bit. Sorry about that.
...
Terminology matters.
Aahh, what a relief...
I have a pedantic itch that I must scrape a bit. Sorry about that.
All light meters and all DSLR account for reciprocity, because reciprocity defines the normal behaviour of film. The fact that 1/60 @ f/8 is the same exposure as 1/125 @ f/5.6 or 1/30 @ f/11 is called (law of) "reciprocity".
The fact that we have to add exposure when the exposure is long, because beyond a certain exposure time the film does not maintain reciprocity (the law of reciprocity doesn't hold true any more) is called something like "reciprocity defect", "reciprocity failure", or whatever it is in English (difetto di reciprocità in my language).
Terminology matters.
Aahh, what a relief...
This is the conclusion some tests in the U.K Professional Photography Magazine came up with a few years ago, the light meters in digital cameras are made to suite the sensors in the individual D.S.L.R model not film, and I.S.O 100 in a DSLR and on film is not the same thing.Yes, being pedantic, you are technically correct that it is "reciprocity failure". DSLRs do NOT account for reciprocity FAILURE because imaging chips don't experience this phenomenon. Neither do silicon diode light sensors in hand-held meters, for that matter. The reasons I recommend against using a DSLR as a meter are twofold: ISO 100 on a DSLR is NOT the same thing as a piece of film rated ISO 100. It varies from digital camera to digital camera, even within a brand or within a model, although the most obvious inconsistency is between Canon and Nikon and Leica (to name three random examples). I can take a calibrated handheld meter and take a reading off a gray card in direct, even sunlight at mid day at sea level and get my expected 1/100 @ f16. Point three different DSLRs at that same gray card and get 1/125th @ f16, 1/90th @ f16, 1/60th @ f16. Accurate enough for color negative film? sure, why not. But for transparency film? no. And the inverse is a pain in the ass too - set the camera at ISO 100, take a meter reading from a hand-held meter to measure strobe output, set the camera accordingly, and when you review the shots later, they have blown out highlights or blocked up shadows. Film ISO and digital ISO are NOT the same things.
Also, because digital cameras don't experience reciprocity failure and they can act like virtual Polaroids, you increase the odds of chimping the 8 second exposure, saying, "wow that looks good" and transferring the 8 seconds at f11 to your film camera, forgetting that at 8 seconds the film you're using needs two stops of reciprocity failure compensation.
With no image to suggest the exposure indicated is what you're looking for, it's easier to remember to calculate reciprocity failure compensation when going from a hand-held meter to the camera. Not that you can't screw it up just as badly with a hand-held meter if you forget to compensate.
... and I.S.O 100 in a DSLR and on film is not the same thing.
Very interesting. Since I'm not a digital photographer I never knew this. I assumed that the digicam designers would have worked that out so they would be "equivelent". How are DSLR and film ISO (mathematically) related? That would be very important knowlege for all who use a DSLR for metering and proofing, I would think.
Very interesting. Since I'm not a digital photographer I never knew this. I assumed that the digicam designers would have worked that out so they would be "equivelent". How are DSLR and film ISO (mathematically) related? That would be very important knowlege for all who use a DSLR for metering and proofing, I would think.
I don't own a DSLR, and I should think we are getting into DPUG territory here, all I can tell you was the tests in Pro Photography Magazine used a Minolta Auto meter V of known accuracy and compared the readings of several DSLRs at 100 I.S.O and got different readings from each camera, and from the meter.Very interesting. Since I'm not a digital photographer I never knew this. I assumed that the digicam designers would have worked that out so they would be "equivelent". How are DSLR and film ISO (mathematically) related? That would be very important knowlege for all who use a DSLR for metering and proofing, I would think.
Does anyone know whether there actually is an ISO standard for light sensitivity for digital sensors?
I have (had) two Sekonics and the Gossen Digi Pro F.
The Gossen is small, lightweight, and works well. But its quality truly feels like something you could buy in the 99 cent stores. I was really surprised. It is WAy over priced for the build quality.
But I do use the Gossen a lot because it does truly fit in pocket.
I have a Sekonic L-358, a Kenko KFM 2100 (Minolta Autometer V1) and a Gossen Digi Pro F and like you Andre I tend to use the Digi Pro the most because of it's pocketability speed and ease of use, deadly accuracy, and because the other two are much too large to fit my pockets, but I can't agree with your remark about the build quality of the Digi Pro F, I find mine a lot tougher than it looks, and in the almost three years I've had it it's been subject to many abuses, is still unmarked and as accurate as ever, so don't let appearances fool you I don't thing Gossen have ever made a light meter that wasn't rugged,workmanlike, and reliable.I have (had) two Sekonics and the Gossen Digi Pro F.
The Gossen is small, lightweight, and works well. But its quality truly feels like something you could buy in the 99 cent stores. I was really surprised. It is WAy over priced for the build quality.
But I do use the Gossen a lot because it does truly fit in pocket.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?