Light Meter advice needed.

[KerrKid]

I got my Vivitar 45 light meter today. I need to do more testing but I believe it's fairly accurate. It tends to match up with the phone app for the most part. I have to put the phone app on "average". My X-570 seems in agreement. My SRT101's are off. Maybe the 201 as well. Kind of a bummer, but using the light meter with them isn't the end of the world.

I like the needle and lollipop on the Vivitar 45. Very easy to line up quickly and the scale isn't too difficult to read.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I got my Vivitar 45 light meter today. I need to do more testing but I believe it's fairly accurate. It tends to match up with the phone app for the most part. I have to put the phone app on "average". My X-570 seems in agreement. My SRT101's are off. Maybe the 201 as well. Kind of a bummer, but using the light meter with them isn't the end of the world.

I like the needle and lollipop on the Vivitar 45. Very easy to line up quickly and the scale isn't too difficult to read.

Perhaps the SRT101s need to be sent out for light meter recalibration.

 

[markjwyatt]

I got my Vivitar 45 light meter today. I need to do more testing but I believe it's fairly accurate. It tends to match up with the phone app for the most part. I have to put the phone app on "average". My X-570 seems in agreement. My SRT101's are off. Maybe the 201 as well. Kind of a bummer, but using the light meter with them isn't the end of the world.

I like the needle and lollipop on the Vivitar 45. Very easy to line up quickly and the scale isn't too difficult to read.

Check if the Minoltas have a different weighting (often bottom weighted). If they are center weighted even, it can be a bit different as most handheld meters are not weighted by default at least (excepting spot meters).

 

[wiltw]

Check if the Minoltas have a different weighting (often bottom weighted). If they are center weighted even, it can be a bit different as most handheld meters are not weighted by default at least (excepting spot meters).

The SRT-101 was the first with 'Contrast Light Compensation'

https://lowendmac.com/2018/minolta-clc-the-first-semi-intelligent-slr-metering-system

"Minolta’s innovation was to use two meter cells, one for the lower portion of the photo, the other for the higher area (which was often that bright sky).​

The camera would compare the output of the two Cadmium Sulfide photo cells. ...rather than use some complex circuitry to calculate an ideal exposure, the cell metering the bottom of the photo was twice as sensitive, so when the output of the two cells was averaged, the foreground had approximately one stop more weight than the sky."​

​

In my earlier suggestion to meter an evenly illuminated featureless target, even CLC is negated in its effect, any built-in biasing in meters or narrowed metering angle area are all EQUALIZED and should result in the same exposure (within 1/6EV) from reflected light meters conforming to the international standard for meter calibration.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Perhaps the SRT101s need to be sent out for light meter recalibration.

When properly calibrated I found the SRT 101's light meter worked very well for slides, the pickiest of films.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The SRT-101 was the first with 'Contrast Light Compensation'

https://lowendmac.com/2018/minolta-clc-the-first-semi-intelligent-slr-metering-system

"Minolta’s innovation was to use two meter cells, one for the lower portion of the photo, the other for the higher area (which was often that bright sky).​

The camera would compare the output of the two Cadmium Sulfide photo cells. ...rather than use some complex circuitry to calculate an ideal exposure, the cell metering the bottom of the photo was twice as sensitive, so when the output of the two cells was averaged, the foreground had approximately one stop more weight than the sky."​

​

In my earlier suggestion to meter an evenly illuminated featureless target, even CLC is negated in its effect, any built-in biasing in meters or narrowed metering angle area are all EQUALIZED and should result in the same exposure (within 1/6EV) from reflected light meters conforming to the international standard for meter calibration.

My Nikon and Nikormat had center metering which I would aim so a small piece of the sky was picked up by the meter but most of the reading would be from other parts of the scene. That would give me better average readings to shoot with.

I still do that today with a digital camera. If the exposure looks wrong on the back screen, I'll move the camera around until the screen value look correct. Then, I'll press the shutter halfway down to lock in the exposure setting, re-aim the shot to frame it, and squeeze off the shot.

 

[xkaes]

Your various meters can only be compared when they are reading the exact same thing.

If your phone is taking a 75 degree view of a scene, it will be different than the Vivitar 45 that might be reading 40 degrees of the scene (In refectance mode), and, as mentioned, the SRT cameras are BOTTOM weighted (when the camera is held horizontally) -- and what the SRT reads depends on what the lens sees.

You can't compare apples and oranges.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Your various meters can only be compared when they are reading the exact same thing.

If your phone is taking a 75 degree view of a scene, it will be different than the Vivitar 45 that might be reading 40 degrees of the scene (In refectance mode), and, as mentioned, the SRT cameras are BOTTOM weighted (when the camera is held horizontally) -- and what the SRT reads depends on what the lens sees.

You can't compare apples and oranges.

That's a great point which raises the main issue about meters. Which one is actually giving you the correct reading?

 

[xkaes]

That's a great point which raises the main issue about meters. Which one is actually giving you the correct reading?

Assuming the meters are functioning correctly, they are all correct -- for what they are reading. It's up to the photographer to decide which is correct. If one meter is pointed at a black dog, it will give you an exposure to create a grey dog. If the meter is pointed at a white dog, it will give you an exposure to create a grey dog. If the meter is pointed at a grey dog, it will give you an exposure to create a grey dog.

On the other hand, if the meter is switched to INCIDENT mode, no matter what dog you are metering, it will come out white, grey or black. The meter will give you the same exposure settings regardless of which dog is the subject -- so a white dog comes out white, a grey dog comes out grey, a black dog comes out black.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Assuming the meters are functioning correctly, they are all correct -- for what they are reading. It's up to the photographer to decide which is correct. If one meter is pointed at a black dog, it will give you an exposure to create a grey dog. If the meter is pointed at a white dog, it will give you an exposure to create a grey dog. If the meter is pointed at a grey dog, it will give you an exposure to create a grey dog.

On the other hand, if the meter is switched to INCIDENT mode, no matter what dog you are metering, it will come out white, grey or black. The meter will give you the same exposure settings regardless of which dog is the subject -- so a white dog comes out white, a grey dog comes out grey, a black dog comes out black.

I was referring to your post #182 where you acknowledged different reflective readings because of different angles of view. I agree with those points. We weren't talking about the color of dogs or incident readings. So which reflective meter is right? A little move this way or that gives you a different reading.

One of the advantages of using a digital camera to read exposures is that it shows what the scene looks like at the different meter exposure selections. You really don't care about the angle of view for the metering.

That's a great point which raises the main issue about meters. Which one is actually giving you the correct reading?

#182 Your various meters can only be compared when they are reading the exact same thing.

If your phone is taking a 75 degree view of a scene, it will be different than the Vivitar 45 that might be reading 40 degrees of the scene (In refectance mode), and, as mentioned, the SRT cameras are BOTTOM weighted (when the camera is held horizontally) -- and what the SRT reads depends on what the lens sees.

You can't compare apples and oranges.

 

[BrianShaw]

That's a great point which raises the main issue about meters. Which one is actually giving you the correct reading?

Define “correct”. (Rhetorical, not a personal challenge, Alan).

Your question reminds me of a book, “Perfect Exposure “ by Roger Hicks. After much discussion and illustration of meters, metering and photography he never really says what “perfect exposure “ is or means.

 

[xkaes]

Whatever you meter with a reflectance meter will come out an 18% mid-tone -- so the correct exposure is to meter something in the scene that is an 18% mid-tone. That's why grey cards are sold. Barring a grey card, you need to be an expert in finding 18% areas in the scene. A lot of people buy spot meters to try to do this, but soon find out it's not easy -- because the human eye automatically adjusts to ambient light.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Define “correct”. (Rhetorical, not a personal challenge, Alan).

Your question reminds me of a book, “Perfect Exposure “ by Roger Hicks. After much discussion and illustration of meters, metering and photography he never really says what “perfect exposure “ is or means.

My problem and I admit it, is where to aim the reflective meter, let's say one with a wider angle of reading. A little this way or a little that way, and you get a different reading. Sure, in the middle of the day when the sun's out, it's easy to get a more"correct" reading. But once the light is difficult, or you are into the magic hour before sunset, it's difficult. That's why I started to use my digital camera for metering.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Whatever you meter with a reflectance meter will come out an 18% mid-tone -- so the correct exposure is to meter something in the scene that is an 18% mid-tone. That's why grey cards are sold. Barring a grey card, you need to be an expert in finding 18% areas in the scene. A lot of people buy spot meters to try to do this, but soon find out it's not easy -- because the human eye automatically adjusts to ambient light.

Also, different items reflect differently. You have to know how to apply the right "compensation" factors. Here's Alex Burke's use of a spot meter on different subjects. His whole book is excellent.

Film in a Digital Age Ebook — Alex Burke Photography

Learn all about film photography, from 35mm up to 4x5, color film landscapes. Master exposure, film selection, and film scanning.

www.alexburkephoto.com

 

[MattKing]

My problem and I admit it, is where to aim the reflective meter, let's say one with a wider angle of reading.

And this is where the skill and experience and knowledge comes in.
There does not exist any meter that will always give the correct result on its own. All meters depend on the user, and their judgment.
Some meters employ complex data gathering systems and algorithms ("Matrix metering") to increase the success rate for those who want to just point a meter and hope that it's suggestion is the right one. Unfortunately, those meters make it harder for those who do have the requisite skill and experience and knowledge to apply it to the subject at hand.

 

[xkaes]

There does not exist any meter that will always give the correct result on its own. All meters depend on the user, and their judgment.

While I won't disagree with this completely, I will say/argue that in my experience with various meters -- I don't mean brands, I mean types of meters -- the incident meter is the winner.

But even with incident meters, there are flat diffusers, round/dome diffusers, etc. and you have to know which to use and where to place them for correct metering. An incident meter with a flat diffuser is basically a reflectance meter with a grey card.

 

[BrianShaw]

My problem and I admit it, is where to aim the reflective meter, let's say one with a wider angle of reading. A little this way or a little that way, and you get a different reading. Sure, in the middle of the day when the sun's out, it's easy to get a more"correct" reading. But once the light is difficult, or you are into the magic hour before sunset, it's difficult. That's why I started to use my digital camera for metering.

Using your digital camera and interrogating its data is fine if that gets you the images you want. In addition to discussing exposure and metering on forums it might be worthwhile for you to read Roger Hick’s book. It’s very inexpensive. I think I paid a couple of dollars plus five more for shipping. Check ABE or Alibris used book sites. It really is a worthwhile book to read to understand the multitude of trade offs with pictures showing the various options.

 

[BrianShaw]

And this is where the skill and experience and knowledge comes in.
There does not exist any meter that will always give the correct result on its own. All meters depend on the user, and their judgment.
Some meters employ complex data gathering systems and algorithms ("Matrix metering") to increase the success rate for those who want to just point a meter and hope that it's suggestion is the right one. Unfortunately, those meters make it harder for those who do have the requisite skill and experience and knowledge to apply it to the subject at hand.

Again… define “correct”. There may be multiple answers depending on artistic vision, etc, etc, and more etc.

Matrix metering is much more than a hope…

 

[KerrKid]

And this is where the skill and experience and knowledge comes in.
There does not exist any meter that will always give the correct result on its own. All meters depend on the user, and their judgment.
Some meters employ complex data gathering systems and algorithms ("Matrix metering") to increase the success rate for those who want to just point a meter and hope that it's suggestion is the right one. Unfortunately, those meters make it harder for those who do have the requisite skill and experience and knowledge to apply it to the subject at hand.

Vivitar agrees with you. The Vivitar 45 instruction booklet was very brief, but ended the instructions with this paragraph (the italics are theirs):

The most important thing to remember is that your meter is a creative tool. By analyzing and modifying basic readings, according to lighting condition and film characteristics, you can creatively control results. It all depends on the effect you want to create. There is a wealth of information available on metering. check with you local photo dealer, bookstore or library for books on specific techniques.

 

[BrianShaw]

Whatever you meter with a reflectance meter will come out an 18% mid-tone -- so the correct exposure is to meter something in the scene that is an 18% mid-tone. That's why grey cards are sold. Barring a grey card, you need to be an expert in finding 18% areas in the scene. A lot of people buy spot meters to try to do this, but soon find out it's not easy -- because the human eye automatically adjusts to ambient light.

Completey correct... and it's not just about the human eye adapting but the latitude of fil, the variance in each part of hte process, and the relative "normalness" of many photographic subjects. After many years using general coverage reflective and /or incident metering, I spent $500 on a spot meter... only to find that only the most unusual scenes really benefit from spot metering. Most scenes, when a few key spot readings are averaged, have recommended exposures not very different from a single general-coverage reflected or incident meter reading.

And I concur with your post #191... incident metering is the winner most of the time.

 

[MattKing]

Matrix metering is much more than a hope…

As I posted, Matrix metering definitely increases the success rate, if one is not up to applying skill and experience and knowledge to interpret a reading. But it is not foolproof.

 

[weasel]

Ha! I am old and have a used a number of meters over the last 50 years, a lot of different cameras. What has worked out best for me over time is when I am shooting roll film, I use an old but consistent Sekonic incident meter. When shooting sheet film where I have advantage of individual development of the negatives, I use an analog pentax spot meter.
I really do not like digital meters; I can see so much more information at a glance with a tradional wheel calculator on an analog meter, but that just may reflect my age, and what I'm used to.
I try an use the same two meters, no matter what camera or film im shooting as I think it eliminates one more variable in the process.

 

[xkaes]

I really do not like digital meters; I can see so much more information at a glance with a tradional wheel calculator on an analog meter, but that just may reflect my age, and what I'm used to.

I agree completely. New is not always better -- usually just more expensive.

If you have two different ways of metering and they agree -- you are all set!!!

Metering can be as simple or as complex as you want -- like the rest of life.

 

[Sirius Glass]

My Nikon and Nikormat had center metering which I would aim so a small piece of the sky was picked up by the meter but most of the reading would be from other parts of the scene. That would give me better average readings to shoot with.

I still do that today with a digital camera. If the exposure looks wrong on the back screen, I'll move the camera around until the screen value look correct. Then, I'll press the shutter halfway down to lock in the exposure setting, re-aim the shot to frame it, and squeeze off the shot.

That is a variant of my statements about not including the sky. One could include a little as you stated, but using a meter is always a judgement call. May people to tell me that they are not getting well exposed photographs had a marked improvement after I suggested that they avoid taking readings of the sky.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Using your digital camera and interrogating its data is fine if that gets you the images you want. In addition to discussing exposure and metering on forums it might be worthwhile for you to read Roger Hick’s book. It’s very inexpensive. I think I paid a couple of dollars plus five more for shipping. Check ABE or Alibris used book sites. It really is a worthwhile book to read to understand the multitude of trade offs with pictures showing the various options.

I ordered both his editions- the first and updated edition and your previously mentioned Perfect Exposure. Thanks. Happy Holidays and Happy New Year. Alan.

Perfect Exposure: A Practical Guide for All Photographers​

The Black & White Handbook: the Ultimate Guide to Monochrome Techniques Updated Edition
The Black and White Handbook: the Ultimate Guide to Monochrome Techniques