In camera metering Nikon f100?

[dylan77]

I was just wanting to see the accuracy of using in camera metering with the f100.

From what I understand slightly overexposing is good, and in camera is also supposed to be good, so what is the real difference between this and using a hand held light meter.

Thanks

 

[Kino]

The F100 as a general rule is very accurate in the many modes it supports, depending upon the situation.

The difference is the camera is analyzing the exposure through the lens using sophisticated algorithms and you are using a hand held meter to directly measure the light that falls on the scene.

Hand-held meters require knowledge and analytical skills to measure the scene to arrive at the desired exposure for the desired effect. The only way to understand this is to try it both ways...

The F100 is a prosumer (professional/consumer split) camera with many functions, so it is hard to generalize about exposure without speaking about a specific mode.

However, you can effect an overall increase in exposure for one or all rolls of film you shoot by setting your exposure compensation adjustment and leaving it for the entire roll.

Back to the hand-held meter:

Take the camera in the field with a hand held meter. Put the F100 in manual mode and compare what you get with the camera with what you get with the meter.

If you attempt this with the program/matrix metering mode, it will be difficult to get equal results since you are starting with such a sophisticated camera and the matrix metering does very non-transparent things that will confuse you.

Read up on exposure modes and how they work, but practice in manual mode with the hand-held meter.

 

[ic-racer]

Matrix metering on the F100 is nice, I use it all the time.

 

[dylan77]

The F100 as a general rule is very accurate in the many modes it supports, depending upon the situation.

The difference is the camera is analyzing the exposure through the lens using sophisticated algorithms and you are using a hand held meter to directly measure the light that falls on the scene.

Hand-held meters require knowledge and analytical skills to measure the scene to arrive at the desired exposure for the desired effect. The only way to understand this is to try it both ways...

The F100 is a prosumer (professional/consumer split) camera with many functions, so it is hard to generalize about exposure without speaking about a specific mode.

However, you can effect an overall increase in exposure for one or all rolls of film you shoot by setting your exposure compensation adjustment and leaving it for the entire roll.

View attachment 236772

Back to the hand-held meter:

Take the camera in the field with a hand held meter. Put the F100 in manual mode and compare what you get with the camera with what you get with the meter.

If you attempt this with the program/matrix metering mode, it will be difficult to get equal results since you are starting with such a sophisticated camera and the matrix metering does very non-transparent things that will confuse you.

Read up on exposure modes and how they work, but practice in manual mode with the hand-held meter.

Thankyou that’s very helpful. I just use aperture priority or manual in matrix. I am currently using metering in the camera with exposure compensation +3 - +5. I will need to get myself a hand held to

 

[dylan77]

Matrix metering on the F100 is nice, I use it all the time.

Matrix metering on the F100 is nice, I use it all the time.

Great to know. In Camera metre?

 

[ic-racer]

 

[Kino]

A good all around and inexpensive meter is the Gossen Luna Pro. About $20 and up on Ebay for a good used model...

 

[Kino]

Great to know. In Camera metre?

Yes.

Don't take this the wrong way, but learning the basics with a F100 is like jumping in a Formula one racer with autopilot to learn how to drive!

If you can afford it, find a very basic, match needle 35mm SLR with a 50mm lens next and use that a bit with the hand-held meter. You'll make mistakes, but you should learn from them if you are a serious student of photography.

 

[dylan77]

A good all around and inexpensive meter is the Gossen Luna Pro. About $20 and up on Ebay for a good used model...

Great thanks

 

[AgX]

-) one gets a better display of figures
-) at certain models one can intuitively place luminances at the scale
-) one can do ambient metering
-) angle of metering is independant of lens attached
-) effective sensitivity is independant of lens attached

 

[ic-racer]

I think the only exposure method with a higher error than a hand-held reflection meter without a viewfinder, would be 'inexperienced guessing.'

 

[AgX]

Your are quite alone with your stand, as aside of spot meters there were hardly any incident light meters with a viewfinder. People seemingly were pleased with meters lacking such finder.
And with a handheld meter you typically can change to ambient metering and by that expose with deliberate deviation for any subject detail.

 

[ic-racer]

Your are quite alone with your stand, as aside of spot meters there were hardly any incident light meters with a viewfinder. People seemingly were pleased with meters lacking such finder.
And with a handheld meter you typically can change to ambient metering and by that expose with deliberate deviation for any subject detail.

I can't right now think of any photographer that used a reflected non-view meter hand-held. How would one possibly know what the meter is reading or interpret the results?
Sekonic made many view meters from 15, 6, 4, 2 and 1 degree. In fact I think almost all their meters (except the dedicated INCIDENT meters) had viewfinders or a viewfinder option. Gossen and many others have attachments to see what is being metered.

 

[Paul Howell]

I use several reflected non spot meters, Gossen, Weston Master IV, GE. In most cases when properly used a standard average meter is quite good. Spots meters came in their own with the popularity of the Zone System. Of all the meters I have include a couple of 1 degree spot metes and a Weston Ranger 9 which reads about 9% my old GE is just as accurate when shooting a scene of average range of values. On the other hand, a little off topic as I don't have a Nikon with matrix metering, when using a Minolta 7 or 9 I tend to use in spot meter mode or average metering as the Minolta version of matrix metering is weighted towards slide film and I shoot almost all black and white. In really tricky lighting I bracket by 2 stops over and under.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The F100 meters very accurately, especially if the photographer know what he is doing.

 

[Ariston]

Man, set it on matrix metering and aperture priority and forget about it. That camera has a great meter.

I wouldn't even use any exposure compensation... especially the three to five stops you mention. You are losing shutter speed and are more likely to get blurry results, unless you know what you are doing (I'm not implying you don't). If you end up way overexposing because of a bright day and fast film, it's probably fine, but I wouldn't do it just for the heck of it.

If you have a digital camera, that is an easy way to experiment with these things. If you have a Nikon DSLR, all the better, since it is basically the same as your F100.

 

[AgX]

I can't right now think of any photographer that used a reflected non-view meter hand-held. How would one possibly know what the meter is reading or interpret the results?
Sekonic made many view meters from 15, 6, 4, 2 and 1 degree. In fact I think almost all their meters (except the dedicated INCIDENT meters) had viewfinders or a viewfinder option. Gossen and many others have attachments to see what is being metered.

Then in your part of the word they used other meters than here. I never came across any Seconic meter, but the Gossen Tele attachment yields 15° too, but in relation to number of meters was rare.

 

[Kino]

I can't right now think of any photographer that used a reflected non-view meter hand-held. How would one possibly know what the meter is reading or interpret the results?

Millions of them! Averaging exposures by using wide-acceptance light meters was widely taught. Spot attachments were relatively uncommon and expensive; not used by the general photographer as a rule.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Man, set it on matrix metering and aperture priority and forget about it. That camera has a great meter.

I wouldn't even use any exposure compensation... especially the three to five stops you mention. You are losing shutter speed and are more likely to get blurry results, unless you know what you are doing (I'm not implying you don't). If you end up way overexposing because of a bright day and fast film, it's probably fine, but I wouldn't do it just for the heck of it.

If you have a digital camera, that is an easy way to experiment with these things. If you have a Nikon DSLR, all the better, since it is basically the same as your F100.

What he said, AND keep the sky out of the field of view when metering.

 

[Chan Tran]

A well calibrated F100 meter has about the same accuracy as a good hand held meter although good hand held meters generally have resolution of 1/10 stop while the F100 like most cameras today has the resolution of 1/3 stop.
The F100 has 3 metering mode, center weighted, spot and matrix and all of them are of the reflective type.
A hand held meter may have one of more of these metering modes: Incident, average reflective and spot.
So whether to use the hand held meter or the built in meter depending on your preference of metering modes. If you want matrix you have to use the built in meter. If you want incident you have to use a hand held meter.

 

[ic-racer]

Millions of them! Averaging exposures by using wide-acceptance light meters was widely taught. Spot attachments were relatively uncommon and expensive; not used by the general photographer as a rule.

Ok but without knowing where the meter is reading it is guesswork and should probably not be taught any more. I used to teach graduate level and did not recommend it. But we are here to explore all ways to get a good negative

 

[Kino]

Ok but without knowing where the meter is reading it is guesswork and should probably not be taught any more. I used to teach graduate level and did not recommend it. But we are here to explore all ways to get a good negative

And yet they worked and good exposures were made.

Just as with a spot meter, you still have to interpret the data. Some subjects you can walk up to and take precise meter readings of various reflections, while some you cannot.

Are you against Sunny 16?

Exposure tables from film information sheets?

All can be used with good results.

It doesn't JUST have to be one way and wide acceptance light meters have been built for over 60 years for a reason; they work.

 

[AgX]

And yet they worked and good exposures were made.

Just as with a spot meter, you still have to interpret the data.

Yes. I hinted at this already. Moreover, a spot meter is needed if there is no way of doing an ambient metering, or if one wants to compare the luminances of subject details. But if one is sure at which relative luminance level one wants to put a certain detail (e.g. skin) than a ambient metering is sufficient.

 

[Bikerider]

My F100 meter gives results little different from that from my F6. In fact I would go so far to say there is no difference at all.

If you want to use a separate meter, that is a bit of a learning curve. I have a Weston Euromaster and a Minolta Autometer 111. Both are getting on a bit and yes they do differ in results when used to gauge the same scene, but what surprises me is the results are so very little different when I use them with my TLR which does not have a meter.

 

[Ariston]

What he said, AND keep the sky out of the field of view when metering.

That’s good advice. I read somewhere that the F100 handles the sky well... as long as you don’t shoot in portrait orientation! But I don’t know. I don’t have one, and I always keep the sky out of the scene on my n90s.