Kodak Retina IIIS Info

[AKodakZen]

Hi,

First time posting here, but I’ve definitely used info from here when threads popped up on google. Seems like there are a lot of people with a lot more knowledge than I have! I’m still a film photography newbie (and a photography newbie in general).

Anyway I recently bought a Retina IIIS and wanted some advice about some of its functions. The meter itself seems to react to light well and the seller said it was about a half stop off and that he had shot film out of it. In comparing it to a light meter app, at first that seemed about right. However, looking closer it seems like there might be too much play in the string that couples the meter to the aperture and speed settings for it to be consistently accurate.
I would be fine using it without the light meter (I’m used to it with my IIc and I really should get a shoe meter anyway) so my question is has anyone ever tried disabling the string or used a IIIS without it?
Thanks for the help!

 

[Hunter_Compton]

Having been inside of a IIIS and restrung the meter, you might run into some issues if you cut the cable (and I should add that doing so will require you to peel the leatherette off the camera and remove the shutter and lens mount to get to the cable drum). The cable provides a bit of friction that helps prevent the aperture control from just spinning freely, or moving from the spring force of the aperture lever in the lenses.

If you want to not use the internal light meter, just ignore it and set the shutter speeds and aperture on top of the lens mount first. (Set the shutter speed first).

Of course, light meters can vary in terms of their viewing angle, so you might see a difference between the viewing angle designed to approximate the 50mm lens on the IIIS, versus the light meter on a smartphone which is designed to have a much larger angle to match the short focal length of the smartphone camera. Also the selenium meter in the camera is just a reflective averaging meter, where the smartphone may use spot or matrix metering. All of this is to say that you may get different reading between each, when in reality they can both be accurate for what they are trying to measure.

My experience with the Gossen made light meters such as that found on the IIIS has been good, my cameras that have them are accurate enough that I've shot slide film with them and it turned out fine. So I'd run some film through it and try it before condemning it.

 

[Paul Howell]

I would not cut the string or disable the meter, a working meter is a selling point for a IIIC or IIIS. As noted by Hunter Compton you can use a hand held meter without much effort, many meters have EV units that can be used or you set the shutter and the aperture will follow.

 

[markjwyatt]

I have a Retina Reflex IV and a Retina IIIc, and the meters function on both, but I usually choose not use them. I would not cut the cord. Of course, I am not familiar with the operation of the IIIS, but if you can get by I would not cut it.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Try aiming the Retina slightly downward when taking meter readings. Selenium cells meter the whole area, plus some, and are prone to metering too much of the sky; especially be wary of any sun hitting the meter directly.

See if your reference meter agrees with the IIIS when metering a flat surface (a wall or the side of a house) from a reasonably close distance.

Manufacturers trying to avoid metering errors from including the sky was the reason that SLR meters before the age of matrix metering were 'center/bottom' weighted. Wide area metering did persist in SLRs to the late 60's in the T & FT Nikon prisms and the Spotmatic. Topcon and Miranda had bottom center weighting in their first metered bodies.

I know of no RF metered cameras with center/bottom weighting. Motorola did have their touted 'CLC' (contrast light compensation (?)) metering but they never spelled out what it did and how it did it except that the metering system used two CdS cells.

 

[markjwyatt]

Try aiming the Retina slightly downward when taking meter readings. Selenium cells meter the whole area, plus some, and are prone to metering too much of the sky; especially be wary of any sun hitting the meter directly...

I took my Retinas out today (based on this discussion, as well as one of my handheld meters (they all ready pretty consistent). Is So. Cal today it is sunny and bright, but with some haze (mountains in distance obscured). My hand held reads sunny-11 (horizontal, pointed down ~10 deg. or incident) Both the Retinas read sunny-16. This is why I tend to just use hand helds. I also need meters less in these conditions, but when I do need them (e.g., lower eVs), my main hand helds (Si-blue or CdS) tend to be more accurate than selenium.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

My hand held reads sunny-11 (horizontal, pointed down ~10 deg. or incident) Both the Retinas read sunny-16.

Funny, all my old Selenium meters read low compared to modern silicon photodiode meters. But then the Se meters are all pretty crappy meters - $6.99 when new and that sort of thing, sentimental value only. My lone Weston V's meter movement gave up the ghost many years back (not a good meter for rock scrambling), cell may be OK.

It's interesting that So. Cal. reads Sunny-11, just like Cleveland, Ohio. Never thought Cleveland shared it's sunshine quota with California - I feel strangely comforted.

 

[markjwyatt]

...

It's interesting that So. Cal. reads Sunny-11, just like Cleveland, Ohio. Never thought Cleveland shared it's sunshine quota with California - I feel strangely comforted.

Just stepped out again (I work from home and have French doors leading to the yard), and took a handheld meter (Sekonic L-308), and with the haze dissipating more, I get f11 or f16 depending on where I was and/or pointed (within reason). Incident is still f11 regardless of the reflected (which is why I trust incident a lot- though the comparison teaches you something also). The L-308 is a digital meter and gives you a reading to the closest f-stop. My more analog meters (Gossen Luna Pro or Luna Pro SBC for instance) can give me a better idea how far in-between readings I am. Once again, analog proves superior to digital . Of course only in the context of some light meters...

Keep in mind, the Retinas have some control of light entering with the tiny aperture on the little front plate of the meter housing. But if you point straight out, you still have around half sky being metered.

 

[AKodakZen]

Having been inside of a IIIS and restrung the meter, you might run into some issues if you cut the cable (and I should add that doing so will require you to peel the leatherette off the camera and remove the shutter and lens mount to get to the cable drum). The cable provides a bit of friction that helps prevent the aperture control from just spinning freely, or moving from the spring force of the aperture lever in the lenses.

If you want to not use the internal light meter, just ignore it and set the shutter speeds and aperture on top of the lens mount first. (Set the shutter speed first).

Of course, light meters can vary in terms of their viewing angle, so you might see a difference between the viewing angle designed to approximate the 50mm lens on the IIIS, versus the light meter on a smartphone which is designed to have a much larger angle to match the short focal length of the smartphone camera. Also the selenium meter in the camera is just a reflective averaging meter, where the smartphone may use spot or matrix metering. All of this is to say that you may get different reading between each, when in reality they can both be accurate for what they are trying to measure.

My experience with the Gossen made light meters such as that found on the IIIS has been good, my cameras that have them are accurate enough that I've shot slide film with them and it turned out fine. So I'd run some film through it and try it before condemning it.

Thanks for such a detailed response. I have Tri-X 400 in it right now so I'll see how it turns out. I'll probably try some shots metered both ways.

In reality, doing anything to the string is probably beyond my skillset anyway. I had heard that the string can stress the mechanism and cause issues, but I know many of them last for years without issues. It's also good to know that the friction of the string contributes to aperture control.

At some point I'll probably just get a shoe meter to use on my meterless IIc so if this roll is over/under exposed I can use that on both.

Thanks again

 

[AKodakZen]

Try aiming the Retina slightly downward when taking meter readings. Selenium cells meter the whole area, plus some, and are prone to metering too much of the sky; especially be wary of any sun hitting the meter directly.

See if your reference meter agrees with the IIIS when metering a flat surface (a wall or the side of a house) from a reasonably close distance.

Manufacturers trying to avoid metering errors from including the sky was the reason that SLR meters before the age of matrix metering were 'center/bottom' weighted. Wide area metering did persist in SLRs to the late 60's in the T & FT Nikon prisms and the Spotmatic. Topcon and Miranda had bottom center weighting in their first metered bodies.

I know of no RF metered cameras with center/bottom weighting. Motorola did have their touted 'CLC' (contrast light compensation (?)) metering but they never spelled out what it did and how it did it except that the metering system used two CdS cells.

I'll have to test the meter on a wall like that on a few different exposure setting and see how it compares. That's interesting that specifically rangefinders don't have weighted meters.

 

[AKodakZen]

Seems like the best route is to just not mess with it unless something actually stops working. Thanks for all the help everyone. Glad there are lots of people that enjoy Retinas as much me

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Seems like the best route is to just not mess with it unless something actually stops working.

Excellent decision.

Old Engineering Adage - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it, because if you fix anything long enough you will really break it."

 

[Cholentpot]

Seems like the best route is to just not mess with it unless something actually stops working. Thanks for all the help everyone. Glad there are lots of people that enjoy Retinas as much me

I have a few. They're excellent cameras.

 

[AKodakZen]

I have a few. They're excellent cameras.

That’s good to hear. My grandfathers IIc with the Rodenstock lens he bought in 1957 in Germany is what got me into shooting film. Retinas are just the most amazing little feats of engineering in my eyes. Glad to hear the IIIS lives up to its name

 

[Cholentpot]

That’s good to hear. My grandfathers IIc with the Rodenstock lens he bought in 1957 in Germany is what got me into shooting film. Retinas are just the most amazing little feats of engineering in my eyes. Glad to hear the IIIS lives up to its name

I have an IIc. Excellent camera. Wonderful lens. Nothing it can't do as an every day snapshot machine.

 

[AKodakZen]

I have an IIc. Excellent camera. Wonderful lens. Nothing it can't do as an every day snapshot machine.

It never ceases to amaze me the quality of pictures that come from it. Almost 70 year old lens and they’re as crisp as anything I’ve seen

 

[Cholentpot]

It never ceases to amaze me the quality of pictures that come from it. Almost 70 year old lens and they’re as crisp as anything I’ve seen

It's also got 'character' something unique about the lens.

 

[AKodakZen]

It's also got 'character' something unique about the lens.

Agreed. Any other models you suggest in the lineup?

 

[Cholentpot]

IIa

Almost the same as IIc but no dumb lens interlock. And a few other things that IIc tried to improve but turned out to be a step back. Like the film advance being where it should rather than on bottom of the camera.

 

[AKodakZen]

IIa

Almost the same as IIc but no dumb lens interlock. And a few other things that IIc tried to improve but turned out to be a step back. Like the film advance being where it should rather than on bottom of the camera.

Might be next on my list then

 

[grain elevator]

Imho the IIa viewfinder is less pleasant, tiny and imprecise w.r.t. framing, no frame lines at all. I don't know the IIc but had a C and it was miles ahead. I think the IIc does have frame lines and a larger eyepiece.

 

[Cholentpot]

Imho the IIa viewfinder is less pleasant, tiny and imprecise w.r.t. framing, no frame lines at all. I don't know the IIc but had a C and it was miles ahead. I think the IIc does have frame lines and a larger eyepiece.

Yes but stupid shutter aperture interlock and the frame reset make it all not worth it.

 

[grain elevator]

Yes but stupid shutter aperture interlock and the frame reset make it all not worth it.

We have very different priorities then, I can live with those.

 

[Cholentpot]

We have very different priorities then, I can live with those.

Or we may be shooting under very different circumstances. I need to be able to change my exposure on the fly. It'd be nice to have even lighting throughout the shoot and never have to change settings but that's not my reality. With the interlock you're stick with the same exposure setting no matter what you change on the camera. Your aperture and shutter will change but your exposure will remain the same. Sure, that's for some people but I do prefer and independent system.

 

[Tangara]

Just stepped out again (I work from home and have French doors leading to the yard), and took a handheld meter (Sekonic L-308), and with the haze dissipating more, I get f11 or f16 depending on where I was and/or pointed (within reason). Incident is still f11 regardless of the reflected (which is why I trust incident a lot- though the comparison teaches you something also). The L-308 is a digital meter and gives you a reading to the closest f-stop. My more analog meters (Gossen Luna Pro or Luna Pro SBC for instance) can give me a better idea how far in-between readings I am. Once again, analog proves superior to digital . Of course only in the context of some light meters...

Keep in mind, the Retinas have some control of light entering with the tiny aperture on the little front plate of the meter housing. But if you point straight out, you still have around half sky being metered.

Something of an aside about light meters:

I think most of the variants of the Sekonic L-308. (at least my L-308S-U) has much better than one f-stop resolution. There is another digit on the display which shows "tenths of a stop". That is, if it shows '2.8 5', it is telling you a measurement half a stop between f/2.8 and f/4.

It's a little goofy-- with the stops themselves being logarithmic, but the fractional stop being tenths, but that's fairly standard, and pretty easy to get used to.

Apparently the L-308S-U allows mode settings to set the shutter speed to 1/3 stops-- I'll have to try that out.

Also, as an aside on an aside, the L-308X-U works in shutter priority or aperture priority, which would be nice...