I don't have a gray card. As an imperfect substitute, I held my hand (Caucasian skin tone) 2 inches from the light meters (hoping to cover the entire field of view), trying to keep the same angle relative to the ceiling light in my office. In that setting, the Luna Pro F meter in reflected-light mode and the phone light meter gave identical answers, within the margin of error: The phone app flickered between 1s and 2s exposure, while the Luna Pro F gave me a reading of 1.5s ---- all at F/16, ISO 200.
In your photos you seem to be orienting the meter same as the phone.
You’re doing that to show the scale right? You took the reading aimed at the tree for example. Right?
Trying to help someone with this over the internet is so much more difficult than in real life, in person!
But I'd be happy to persevere, if you would like, as I'm sure many others would.
FWIW, I think your meter is working correctly.
And I really like working with that model of meter, or a few that are similar.
My meters are old, but I have 4 or 5 of the same model, they're all in agreement.
I am always grabbing the old Kodak Photoguide books. You can use the examples and usually hit perfect.
P/s: Personally, I don't trust any light meter result output from phone. I would use digital camera with iso 100 and average metering mode to compare with handheld light meter.
Yeah. I didn't think of grabbing my digital camera.
Here is a screenshot of the metering modes available to me. The default setting sounds sounds like a bit of auto-magic, so I guess maybe I'll choose the center-weighted option.
View attachment 408120
Msh.... my meters are old and work too but I know their history......they're not unknowns bought off the internet 40 yrs after production ceased.
Like others, I would verify if it works....but not by comparison with some cell phone app.....
For that matter DCY ..... buy a meter from a photo dealer who's guaranteed it's accurate and in working order.
I honestly don’t trust any cell phone meter. You should just assume the Luna Pro is right and start comparing everything else to it.
Keep in mind that whatever you point a meter at in reflected mode will attempt to render it middle gray. If you point it at a white subject in reflected mode, you will probably underexpose the subject by roughly 3 stops, so you have to mentally adjust the reading (in the case of a white card, open up 3 stops) when metering a subject in reflected mode that is not middle gray (or Zone V).
Luckily, with a meter that can take reflective and incident reading, it's easy to establish how close the surface is to middle gray.
How? If the subject is 18% gray then two readings should be the same?
How? If the subject is 18% gray then two readings should be the same?
To have the same reading the meter must have the flat diffuser instead of a dome.
How? If the subject is 18% gray then two readings should be the same?
Technically true, perhaps, but the difference will be negligible.
Don’t get us started.
18% is a gray standard that you can buy, but it’s not the meter calibration target.
The gray which will match an incident reading is somewhere around 12%.
Oh, joy… you bring K and C into the discussion. This should be interesting discussion!
I don't have a gray card. As an imperfect substitute, I held my hand (Caucasian skin tone) 2 inches from the light meters (hoping to cover the entire field of view), trying to keep the same angle relative to the ceiling light in my office. In that setting, the Luna Pro F meter in reflected-light mode and the phone light meter gave identical answers, within the margin of error: The phone app flickered between 1s and 2s exposure, while the Luna Pro F gave me a reading of 1.5s ---- all at F/16, ISO 200.
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?