How Many People Use A Hand-Held Meter?

Do you use a hand-held meter?

  • I always use a hand held meter.

    Votes: 164 39.4%

  • I usually use a hand held meter. It depends on the situation

    Votes: 233 56.0%

  • I never use a hand held meter. I use the one built into the camera or none at all.

    Votes: 19 4.6%
  • Total voters
    416

BobNewYork

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
1,067
Location
Long Island,
Format
Medium Format
Q.G. - FYI using a meter, spot, incident or in-camera, is NOT posing. They are each better than the other under certain circumstances. To make exposure decisions we need raw data. Different meters provide more accurate data under different conditions. An in-camera meter will not tell you if the brightness range exceeds your film and processing parameters - a spot meter will.

We are clever but human evaluations are relative - exposure meter's are absolute as are the limitations of film / processing / printing.

Bob
 

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format
CPorter said:
Ok, I'll bite. Why?
Click to expand...

Quite simple: because it offers the most opportunities to get things wrong.
Unless, of course, you use it to take one single reading off a grey card.

'Integral', or large angle reflective light metering is harder to get wrong.

Incident light metering is nearly impossible to get wrong.


Mind you (not that you start believing this to mean that you will - inevitably - get things wrong more often using a spot meter): i have already said that if you know what you are doing, you can get things right with any type of meter.

But it is true that a spot meter offers more opportunity to get things wrong. So if you don't quite know what you are doing, stay away from spot meters, and get yourself an incident light meter.
 

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format
JBrunner said:
Then why do I bother with it? There must be a reason...
Click to expand...
So? What is it?

maybe it has to do with developing. Hope I haven't been duped...
Click to expand...
The expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights thing?
A quite good thing it is indeed.

But not something requiring spot meters. We are quite good at recognizing high or low contrast scenes, and it's not High Art to decide what film to use when and how to process it.
And a (to some perhaps surprisingly) small choice of film and processing options covers all that needs to be covered.
 

Ian David

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
1,132
Location
QLD Australia
Format
Multi Format
Q.G. - are you in the business of selling incident light meters?

Incident light meters are great. So are spot meters. It is very easy to get things right with a spot meter. If someone can manage a manual camera, they can manage a spot meter.
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,812
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
 

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format

Actually, no. Shooting sheet film offers a very wide range of processing options. Knowing precisely what place and fall are going to affect within the composition, and how I will ultimately develop and print the negative to achieve my intent is very valuable information.

I have a much higher chance of producing an average negative with an averaging meter, and I don't like average negatives. They are simply more work for less result in the end. Incident metering has its place, but dismissing a more precise tool simply because it takes more knowledge and effort to make use of it? I don't think so. To each his/her own, and if your comfort zone or work style makes one tool more appropriate, then of course it is "the better tool". Saying your tool or method is the best tool for everybody is provincial.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format

Sure.
I tried to resist, but i will now point out that 'even St Ansel' carried two films, with two processing options each.
He didn't do badly, did he?


JBrunner said:
I have a much higher chance of producing an average negative with an averaging meter, and I don't like average negatives.
Click to expand...
You also have a chance to produce any other negatove using an averaging meter.
As mentioned before, it is not the meter that determines what you do with it.

The difference between the tools is not that one is more precise than the other.
The difference is in the length of the process you have to go through to arrive at the exact same result.

Saying your tool or method is the best tool for everybody is provincial.
Click to expand...

Indeed. That was and still is my point.

So be careful when saying things like "more precise", "average negatives" and all that.
 

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format
Quite right.
 

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format
Q.G. said:
You also have a chance to produce any other negatove using an averaging meter.
As mentioned before, it is not the meter that determines what you do with it.

Click to expand...

I prefer not to leave things to chance. Averaging meters make determinations. Spot meters give unbiased information about specific things. Better decisions can be made with more precise information.
 

IloveTLRs

Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
1,132
Location
Boston
Format
Sub 35mm
Recently I've been trying to go without a meter. I feel like it's a crutch when shooting B&W.
 

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format
IloveTLRs said:
Recently I've been trying to go without a meter. I feel like it's a crutch when shooting B&W.
Click to expand...

Rock on. St Edward didn't need no stinkin meters!
 

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Sunny 16 never fails, so I use it when the angle of the sun is such that I need my crutch.

The less you use the meter, the better you become at judging. Takes a bit of film to get there, though.
 

Chuck_P

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
2,369
Location
Kentucky
Format
4x5 Format
O.G.

Your're pushing some poor advice IMO (I can't say it any better that what Jason said). Any new folks listening in need to know the pitfalls and positive aspects of each: wide area reflective metering, incident metering, and narrow angle reflective spot metering. I think it's highly pretentious of you to continue your line of rationale, but it's your right to do so.
 

Wade D

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
897
Location
Jamul, CA
Format
Multi Format
I use an old Sekonic L-86 meter that I bought in 1971. Still works great.
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,970
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
I do have four cameras with TTL metering, but can't help feeling sometimes It's a bit like painting by numbers, and if I use a hand held meter, think about the exposure before setting the camera and don't let the camera do the thinking for me I have contributed more to the final result.
 

BobNewYork

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
1,067
Location
Long Island,
Format
Medium Format

I hear you. I think it's really a question of getting to know the shortcomings of each meter and then using the appropriate meter for your particular requirements. TTL is invaluable for such things as street shooting - but it can get fooled under some conditions. Incident is great for many situations, but again it's not useful for a distant subject where you can't place the meter appropriately - the spot meter comes into it's own here. At the end of the day are you happy with your results? If so you're doing it the right way IMHO. I'm not so sure that it's the journey in photography, but the destination that's most important.

Bob
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,970
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
Well said Bob, I agree entirely It's having the knowledge and experience to recognise the situations that would fool TTL metering.
 

Jean Noire

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
587
Format
Multi Format
This has been an interesting thread to read.
One thing concerns me is why is this a poll?
It is interesting and informative to discus the merits, or otherwise, of hand held meters but asking for numbers is collecting raw data and smacks of market research. Is this the case? If not why do you want numbers?
Regards
John.
 

David Nardi

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
87
Location
Ontario, Can
Format
4x5 Format
I think there's really no other choice for LF shooters. Especially those that shoot on color transparency film like I do.

The Sekonic L-558 has worked flawlessly for me every time. It's a great way to keep all your values in check as the light changes. Hand-held meters are so useful that I don't even trust my built in camera meters anymore.

David

David S. Nardi Photography
www.davidnardi.com
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,812
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
I used to have a meter even when I don't have a camera. Meter and camera are not related.
 

BobNewYork

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
1,067
Location
Long Island,
Format
Medium Format
Chan Tran

I used to have a meter even when I don't have a camera. Meter and camera are not related.
Click to expand...

But isn't a meter without a camera a bit like having a.....Ah, never mind!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…