Dilemma

[tim k]

Take em both. Go have fun. Shoot more, worry less. You'll soon decide which is your real cup of tea.

With your 5d, you'll know in 2 seconds if its a keeper. With your negative, you'll likely have something that you can grow into, and come back to for years to come, as your printing skills develop.

 

[jp498]

For a small basic lightweight meter, pick up a sekonic l208. That's what I mostly use with LF and MF. For flash use, I have a minolta IV flash meter, which aught to be pretty cheap used. I stay away from the 30+ year old antique meters; it's not that expensive to have something modern and reliable.

For use, I just re-meter when light conditions change, such as when things become overcast, or you change to be shooting under a tent/awning. It mostly sits idle. If you are shooting negative film, exposure isn't super critical.

Once you can leave the digital camera behind, you can begin to use the camera with the confidence that it should do what you tell it.

 

[BrianL]

You use the digital like I used to use my Polaroid. After a while, I slid into just using the Polaroid. Had to break the habit by leaving it at home but after learning not to rely on it, I did use it for proofing a setup. No harm in that. Just don't slide the way I did.

I'd recommend getting a hand held meter. Brand and model is not critical provided it is working and reading correctly for its spec. Then, leave the cameras at home and with pen, paper and meter go out and learn to read light using the Sunny 16 rule. Estimate the settings, write them down and then compare them to a meter reading. If like others, it will take a little time to dial in your eyes but geting to within 1 f/stop should not take long. Getting to within 1/3rd f/stop is the long part of the learning curve. 1 f/stop for most film except transparency will yield good results. The 1/3rd f/stop is better and pretty well needed for transparency film. It is easier than it sounds but takes practice.

When you've goten to within the 1 f/stop pretty consistently, then load the camera and do some test shooting. You need to dial it in with the meter as the shutter speeds are almost never exact with cameras and not all meters read the same. Some will read 18% grey rather than 16% as a normal spec. A little practice will sort this out. If possible do get a grey card. Kodak made them and they are excellent working tools to keep in the kit.

The DSLR can become a tool for checking your visualization of the composition but, remember the ratio of width to height will be different so allowances have to be made for it.

 

[winger]

Heh, not quite *that* young. I'm 25. I used film cameras when I was younger, but I didn't get into photography as a real hobby until 2 years ago. I'm not afraid of not getting *anything*, I'm just worried about not getting the best that I possibly can out of a scene. Driving a few hours to someplace in particular for photography purposes only to make a technical error isn't my idea of a good time haha. I know it happens, but it's still not fun.

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. If you want to take the good ones on film, then you need to use film. You will miss some for technical reasons - most of us here still do on occasion. We just try to not miss others and learn from the ones we missed.
When you use the 5D, how often do you look at the LCD and realize you royally screwed up? If it isn't that often, then you'll likely have similar results with film - you just don't get to look right after you shoot.
Find nearby subjects for practice and I think you'll find that you're better than you think.

 

[Roger Cole]

Take em both. Go have fun. Shoot more, worry less. You'll soon decide which is your real cup of tea.

With your 5d, you'll know in 2 seconds if its a keeper. With your negative, you'll likely have something that you can grow into, and come back to for years to come, as your printing skills develop.

Can't agree with this, as having both of them is the problem now. You'll use the quick and easy one with instant gratification (or at least feedback) as you've proven. If you don't have it, you can't use it.

Since you have a built in meter in your Mamiya I'm not even sure why you're taking the DSLR to meter with. Is the Mamiya meter broken?

 

[MattKing]

Does anyone else here find the images on LCD screens on the back of these cameras to be poor at best, and misleading at worst?

 

[elekm]

Here's the problem. Your dSLR. Leave it at home. Just take one camera. Then you're forced to work with one camera.

 

[tkamiya]

Since the OP is digitally inclined and his main concern is getting a perfect exposure, let me try it this way.... If my figures are off, please jump in and correct me.

As far as I know, most of today's common CCD and CMOS based SLRs are capable of capturing about 10 stops of light and in reality about 8 to 9 stops of usable dynamic range due to noise at low light end. (am I right so far?) It's more like slide films. In comparison, B&W films are capable of at least 12, often 14 stops, and color films extend this by two more stops.

With this in mind, to capture a great image comparable to digital images, we can be off by as much as 4 stops and still produce satisfactory images. 4 stops is A LOT to be off... (and not realize it)

ps. Am I crossing _the_line_ by making direct comparisons like this? If so, please delete!

 

[Six]

Thanks for all of the advice guys. I will definitely take it to heart and stop taking the 5d everywhere. And no, the meter in the mamiya is not broken per say, but I have found it to be less than satisfactory...it's difficult to predict, imo.

 

[Roger Cole]

Thanks for all of the advice guys. I will definitely take it to heart and stop taking the 5d everywhere. And no, the meter in the mamiya is not broken per say, but I have found it to be less than satisfactory...it's difficult to predict, imo.

Then maybe you don't know how to use it well? Just a guess, not a slam. I don't know this camera so I don't know what kind of meter it has, but the digital will have some form of multi zone evaluative metering. It will meter the light in several parts of the scene, compare the results to a known database, and select an exposure based on what it "thinks" you are shooting. So, for example, if you have a brighter area above it may assume that's sky and expose for the foreground. With a handheld meter or older in-camera meters you have to know what you're metering yourself (or use a handheld in incident mode.) It's more trouble, but all part of taking the process for your own.

 

[ozphoto]

Just go out and shot film - the mistakes you make will teach you so much more about shooting film than you ever thought possible.
Don't pressure yourself into getting *perfect* images every time you press the shutter; enjoy shooting film, forget digital for the time you spend with the 7 - I absolutely *love* shooting film after doing nothing but digital for work.

A handheld meter (those 308s are really good) will help immensely with exposure, and if in doubt: bracket the shot - I still do this sometimes, just in case I'm concerned my view of the scene isn't quite right at the time.

The sunny 16 rule - I use this with my old folder and 90% of the time, my exposures are spot on.

Just go out and have FUN.

 

[P C Headland]

As others have said, leave the DSLR at home, and just take the Mamiya. Play around with the meter a bit and learn how it reads a scene. Carry an exposure card with you and then compare what that suggests to what the Mamiya is suggesting.

Or, if you're still worried about getting all the settings rights before taking a shot on film, maybe get a very simple film camera - one with two shutter speeds (B and "instant"), one or two apertures and zone focus if you're lucky. Something like an Agfa Clack or a box camera. You'll end up focusing (!) entirely on composition, and will start to see how forgiving film is.

Whatever you do, you need to leave the digital behind, and have confidence in your ability. After all, if all the doddery old fools here can get images out of them old film cameras, you should be able to

 

[michaelbsc]

Yeah, leave the D5 at home.

I'll second the idea of the Fred Parker site mentioned early in the postings. With modern film it is easy to stay in the film's exposure latitude.

 

[markbarendt]

I have to ditto the idea of getting a handheld incident meter and leaving the digital at home.

The other thing I'd suggest with this is to stick with one film speed (not necesarrily one film, just one speed) until you get comfy.

 

[KanFotog]

As someone who recently switched to 35 film SLR from digital point and shoots, I'd like to tell you that film isn't all that scary at all.

Given that the meter on my Nikon F80 is really accurate most of the times (except when I'm being an idiot) I suppose the Mamiya has to be equally good, if not better.

I wonder whether it's a mindset thing where you've already decided that the meter isn't good and that is leading to its incorrect usage and ultimately, unsatisfactory pics?

Anyways, far as suggestions are concerned:
1. As many have already said, leave the 5D at home.

2. Try shooting on 35mm film. That could serve as a cross-over. I'm not aware of the Canon system but my guess is the lens(es) you already have will be useful on the film body too so that familiarity might give you more confidence.

3. Try shooting on a fixed focal length lens for a while. From what I could gather on the net, there aren't any zoom lenses available for the medium format you've chosen.

4. Did you worry with a DSLR that by the time you got home the memory card would be corrupted and all the images lost? My bet is you didn't. Have the same confidence with film. Stop worrying, start shooting!

Cheers!

 

[vpwphoto]

Dang we commercial shooters had big brass B%%ls in the film days shooting $2000 assignments without a net.
And we put all the film in a box and shipped it to a lab... no backups. I did very occasionally ship it in two boxes on two days.

 

[vpwphoto]

Histograms

Does anyone else here find the images on LCD screens on the back of these cameras to be poor at best, and misleading at worst?

One word "histograms".
Nuf said.
I remember color balancing via Histograms on a black and white monitor when the first briefcase scanners were issued by the AP for field use.

Hey this is DPUG territory!

 

[wblynch]

Heck, 99% (I made that number up) of all film cameras ever made were fixed focus, fixed aperture and fixed shutter speed.

People put film in them and went out and took photos. They never knew about settings or meters.

They knew that indoors or at night one needed a flash bulb.

Just think, all those billions of photos shot and memories captured without a single meter.

 

[vpwphoto]

Yes but there were a lot of thin negatives...

 

[Klainmeister]

Back to the OP: with the M7, look thru the viewfinder at an object that you want to meter with your finger on the shutter button and it will give you a reading for the glowing middle spot on the RF. At least in practice, that's how I've learned to use it. So if there's a scene with lots of different lighting, point it at your %18 spot you want, read the viewfinder settings, adjust, take picture with that. It takes a little while to get used to.

 

[cfclark]

Leave the DSLR at home (note, I did not say get rid of it--I have a DSLR, too), and go shoot. Once you've worked with your camera's meter and/or a handheld meter, done some reading about the "rules", and gone through some of the learning curve, shooting film will start to come naturally. And don't worry too much about wasting film or missing shots, there's no way you can capture everything you see (although I've seen plenty of digital shooters try). (Garry Winogrand is supposed to have said, when someone asked him about 'missing' shots, "if I'm not photographing, there are no photographs to miss".*)

And unless you're a professional and on the hook to deliver something, I wouldn't worry too much about having driven somewhere for photographic purposes and made a technical error. I've done such things as hike in to a place I wanted to shoot with my P67 and tripod, shoot a roll of what I thought was 220 film, then realize that I'd left my 120/220 switch set to 220 and shot at least 10 shots on nothing but the back plate. It was still a great day (once I reloaded and fixed that little problem). If you're still learning, and especially if you're an amateur, you have to feel free not to be the best, at least at first.

I do like the suggestion of picking a film speed and sticking with it--I think I shot nothing but Tri-X (400) all through high school. That eliminates another issue I've had, which is forgetting to reset the ISO when I change film. (This will be easier to do as Kodak axes everything but Tri-X anyway.)

*Any Winogrand fans, feel free to correct me about this.

 

[mr. mohaupt]

Ok well I'm not much older than you but I have some suggestions. I shoot a lot of film now with a meter, without a meter, whatever but to get there I had to learn not to "chimp." I worked for a large news paper for a few years and really early on I leaned that everytime I looked at the back of the camera I would MISS the shot! This lead me to put a piece of Gaffers Tape on the LCD and trust what I know about photography and metering.
You should try that. Turn off the review and DO NOT look at the images until you get home. This directly translates to using film. You shoot a roll and then that night you develop the roll and throw it on the light table.

There are a lot of gruffy guys on here who sometimes forget that digital is a medium just like 35mm, 120, 4x5, ect. You just need to learn how to use them to your and their full potential.

In the end though I find myself agreeing with said gruffy guys. Viva anolog!

Happy shooting,
~M

 

[Diapositivo]

The problem with digital is that the much abrupt burning of highlights makes chimping a necessity, or at least a sensible practice, albeit a boring and slowering one. (Besides, the technique of "exposing to the right" is a sensible thing to do with digital, when time is friend, and it implies chimping as well).

With slide film the burning of highlights is less abrupt than with digital. It has a "foot" which is the part of the response which is not linear (and a "shoulder" on the other side, the shadows). It's not a concrete wall, but some kind of a mattress. You don't hurt yourself unless you bang your highlights on it really "big way". Digital lacks this "foot" and that is its biggest shortcoming technically IMO. With digital the transition from detail to washed-out-and-bleached white is abrupt.

Negative film is much more forgiving than slide film, it is in another league. (With negative the "foot" corresponds to the shadows and the "shoulder" to the highlights, just for precision's sake).

So the advice by Mr. Mohaupt, while being overall valid and good practice, might induce insecurity when you come back home and find highlight details of your digital pictures burned too often. While doing this kind of practice, just keep in mind that film is more forgiving than digital and that in most cases those highlights will be rendered much more gracefully. And it is precisely this rendering which will make you love film.

 

[36cm2]

Someone earlier in the thread compared live view to a ground glass. If the OP misses live view, then the clear answer is to carry the M7 and a womping 8X10 camera for those needy moments It's like watching TV my friend.

More seriously, it sounds like the M7 uses a spotmeter system and the OP just hasn't gotten used to using it correctly. Get that technique down or, if you really don't trust it, get a standalone meter and rock on. D5 stays at home.

 

[SFC]

Heh, not quite *that* young. I'm 25. I used film cameras when I was younger, but I didn't get into photography as a real hobby until 2 years ago. I'm not afraid of not getting *anything*, I'm just worried about not getting the best that I possibly can out of a scene. Driving a few hours to someplace in particular for photography purposes only to make a technical error isn't my idea of a good time haha. I know it happens, but it's still not fun.

I hate to say this, but it seems the OP is simply psychologically unable to comfortably shoot film. I don't think he can do it. Maybe once, but then when he doesn't capture photographic magic on the first trip from home, he'll blame film and be back to the shooting the 5d intravenously. You might as well ask a teenager to just leave the phone at home. Sorry, Six, 25 is young, but it's still too late for you.