I have a Gossen Profisix (Luna Pro SBC) I retired to my sock draw about two years ago because modern digital light meters also have Silicon Blue Cells, often 2 and are much quicker and simpler to operate, can read the light to 1/10th of a stop, are much less cumbersome, and more versatile can read a mixture of ambient light and flash and balance them, have a built in 1º spot meter and remember up to 9 meter readings and average them if required. The Lunapro S.B.C was a cutting edge meter more than twenty years ago but in my humble opinion the modern digital meters are much better and my Kenko KFM 2100 runs off a single AA battery which is even more common than a 9Volt PP3.
My Gossen died, your thoughts on what meter to replace it with
-
A
- Thread starter Ricus.stormfire
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Want to Buy Omega D5500 with Dichroic Head, Australia
- Started by andrewherrick
-
For Sale Two Graflex 6x9 film backs for Graflex RB 6x9 (2x3)
- Started by Alex Varas
-
For Sale Nokton 40mm f/.14 SC for Leica M cameras.
- Started by Alex Varas
-
For Sale Nikon F2AS + Nikkon 50mm f/1.8 Ai - CLA'd in July 2025.
- Started by Alex Varas
Forum statistics
Suit yourself - I like mine. And there's something vaguely heretical about using a digital meter with my Yashocamat anyway. 
And for the whatever number time I certainly KNOW that selenium generates a current on light exposure and doesn't need batteries. Anyone who ever tinkered with electronics knows that. And anyone who didn't would have still learned it earlier in this thread.
And for the whatever number time I certainly KNOW that selenium generates a current on light exposure and doesn't need batteries. Anyone who ever tinkered with electronics knows that. And anyone who didn't would have still learned it earlier in this thread.
Last edited by a moderator:
Even at the age of seventy three I don't understand why some people in the 21st century have such a adversity to equipment that is battery dependant carrying spare batteries in your bag isn't heavy or difficult and speaking personally I've had only two new Lithium batteries in my Canon A1 in over twenty years and only one AA battery in nearly three years I have owned my digital light meter.Suit yourself - I like mine. And there's something vaguely heretical about using a digital meter with my Yashocamat anyway.
And for the whatever number time I certainly KNOW that selenium generates a current on light exposure and doesn't need batteries. Anyone who ever tinkered with electronics knows that. And anyone who didn't would have still learned it earlier in this thread.
Oh, there's just something nice about having to depend only upon the sun for power.
One less thing to think of.
Why should you?
People are stating their opinions and preferences.
They do not invite nor require your evaluation.
- Leigh
On the selenium meter thought. I am wonder if I can build a meter out of modern solar cell? They seem to generate significantly more power than the selenium cell of the same size.
I don't get the battery thing either, unless the type is rare and hard to come by and/or expensive. You have to carry enough film. WTH, carry enough batteries.
You can. It's just a matter of calibrating the meter movement and scale to the response curve of the cell. Modern cells are likely more durable, however the extra power is of no account - you don't need it.
Theoretically yes. There's a lot of research going on in photovoltaics, and the technology is changing rapidly.
Two obvious issues to be addressed:
1) spectral response v. that of film, and
2) sensitivity (i.e. performance at low light levels).
It would certainly be worth some experimentation.
- Leigh
Why bother if you don't need to? Have you ever researched how much energy goes into producing a single AA cell vs. what you get out of it? They're horrible.
I love simple things that work - I think the hinge is an elegant device.
Yes it would be worth looking into. I have a 'solar' powered scientific calculator that works under very low light, such as a single 11w CFL used on a porch at night, maybe 8-9 feet away.
What about just getting a Seconic L-398A Studio Delux III ? They have done it already to replace the selenium with a silicon cell
Ulrich
Hi ulrich,
Chan Tran was asking about a modern replacement for Selenium, which is a generator of electricity.
Silicon is not a generator, it's a resistor, so it requires a battery.
Selenium or a modern replacement would not need a battery.
- Leigh
I would not hesitate the endorse the purchase of a used Minolta Autometer, the IVf or the Vf version.
Kenko purchased the Autometer Vf design after Minolta exited the lightmeter business, rebadged it and now sell it as their KFM-1100
Kenko purchased the Autometer Vf design after Minolta exited the lightmeter business, rebadged it and now sell it as their KFM-1100
You may want to have a look here. In german it's said to be a 'amorphe Silizium-Zelle' 'Silizium' is german for silicon.
Ulrich
The Sekonic L-398A 111 has a selenium photocell according to their spec. http://www.sekonic.com/Products/L-398A/Specifications.aspx it's only the receptor that has a Silicon photo diode.
The specs are indeed ambiguous:
'Light Receptor Element: Amorphous silicon photocell'
'Battery(Power): Self-powered: Selenium photocell eliminates need for batteries'
In German the last cite is:
'Batterie (Leistung): Eigene Stromversorgung: Photozellenfühler beseitigt Notwendigkeit für Batterien'
Nothing about selenium in the German text. The power is supplied by the photocell.
I think, they missed this point with the update from selenium to silicon in the English version of the specs. There are no two cells in this light meter. I own one, so I can tell from visual inspection.
Yes I have found that the Amorphous Silicon Photocell is a type of solar cell that its output current is linear to the illumination over a very wide range. Very interesting.
I suggest buying a second-hand light meter with a SBC or GaSP "cell".
The real question you should ask is whether you want a light meter with an analogue scale or one with a digital display.
Both have their pros and cons.
An analogue scale will probably give you the EV value and a series of f/stop - shutter speed "couples" all in a glance. You will have to observe a dial, a disc, something a bit carefully.
A digital display will give you a big number (for EV) or big numbers (for exposure "couples"). This will seem to be faster, more immediate to read, but that is not necessarily the case if you are not fast in mentally converting a certain EV in the desidered f-stop or desired shutter speed.
I tend to "think" now in EV terms so the digital display is not bad but overall I don't consider it better than an analogue display.
The ISO values (ASA-DIN in old instruments) should be clearly and evidently shown, and should not move by accident. Meters which have the reading depend from the ISO value (the "pointer" is the actual ISO value) are the best as you have to be "conscious" of the ISO film you are using at every reading.
You should also consider whether you plan to use the light meter in low light conditions. In that case the EV range (which you will find in the technical specifications) will be of importance. The possibility to light the display in very low light conditions can also be useful (although if you take pictures in very low light conditions you probably carry a portable lamp with you). SBC will have a wider range but an instrument going down to EV -2 is obviously 4 times more sensitive than an instrument going down to EV 2.
Another thing I would pay attention to is whether the light meter can do both incident and reflected light metering. Incident is a must, reflective is a nice bonus.
I would avoid cheap light meters, especially selenium ones, such as the Gossen Sixtino II I have, as they tend to be quite unreliable and flirt with uselessness.
Some meters will allow a measure without the dome (with a flat cover instead) which is useful for studio situation and in general when you have to accurately measure illumination ratio between sources of light.
Some meters will compute averages for you, which can be handy (mental computations with photographic values can lead to mistakes).
Some other will compute the combined effect of flash and ambient light and tell you directly the illumination ratio (useful for studio work).
A good light meter is never wasted money. You can now buy for a few hundred dollars (or less) a light meter which would have costed a month wage 20 years ago. Go for quality, I say.
The real question you should ask is whether you want a light meter with an analogue scale or one with a digital display.
Both have their pros and cons.
An analogue scale will probably give you the EV value and a series of f/stop - shutter speed "couples" all in a glance. You will have to observe a dial, a disc, something a bit carefully.
A digital display will give you a big number (for EV) or big numbers (for exposure "couples"). This will seem to be faster, more immediate to read, but that is not necessarily the case if you are not fast in mentally converting a certain EV in the desidered f-stop or desired shutter speed.
I tend to "think" now in EV terms so the digital display is not bad but overall I don't consider it better than an analogue display.
The ISO values (ASA-DIN in old instruments) should be clearly and evidently shown, and should not move by accident. Meters which have the reading depend from the ISO value (the "pointer" is the actual ISO value) are the best as you have to be "conscious" of the ISO film you are using at every reading.
You should also consider whether you plan to use the light meter in low light conditions. In that case the EV range (which you will find in the technical specifications) will be of importance. The possibility to light the display in very low light conditions can also be useful (although if you take pictures in very low light conditions you probably carry a portable lamp with you). SBC will have a wider range but an instrument going down to EV -2 is obviously 4 times more sensitive than an instrument going down to EV 2.
Another thing I would pay attention to is whether the light meter can do both incident and reflected light metering. Incident is a must, reflective is a nice bonus.
I would avoid cheap light meters, especially selenium ones, such as the Gossen Sixtino II I have, as they tend to be quite unreliable and flirt with uselessness.
Some meters will allow a measure without the dome (with a flat cover instead) which is useful for studio situation and in general when you have to accurately measure illumination ratio between sources of light.
Some meters will compute averages for you, which can be handy (mental computations with photographic values can lead to mistakes).
Some other will compute the combined effect of flash and ambient light and tell you directly the illumination ratio (useful for studio work).
A good light meter is never wasted money. You can now buy for a few hundred dollars (or less) a light meter which would have costed a month wage 20 years ago. Go for quality, I say.
Last edited by a moderator:
I would avoid cheap light meters, especially selenium ones, such as the Gossen Sixtino II I have, as they tend to be quite unreliable and flirt with uselessness.
Lots of technical and theory stuff in this thread. However, I have happily used Weston (Selenium) meters for over 40 years to good effect and will remain so. They are (now) very cheap, suit my needs and respond to light the same as B&W film.
I have a Gossen Profisix (Luna Pro SBC) I retired to my sock draw about two years ago because modern digital light meters also have Silicon Blue Cells, often 2 and are much quicker and simpler to operate, can read the light to 1/10th of a stop
Who on earth needs readings to 1/10 of a stop? and what could be quicker than the Weston's dial - meter, set arrow to appropriate setting, sorted.
You should also consider whether you plan to use the light meter in low light conditions.
No meter can be accurate at low light levels because you need to accommodate for reciprocity. For all my city night photography, I use the Weston to meter the brightest highlight, place it on Zone VIII and then apply the reciprocity factor. Using this method, I have never had a (technically) dud image.
Best,
David
www.dsallen.de
Lots of technical and theory stuff in this thread. However, I have happily used Weston (Selenium) meters for over 40 years to good effect and will remain so. They are (now) very cheap, suit my needs and respond to light the same as B&W film.
I have a Gossen Profisix (Luna Pro SBC) I retired to my sock draw about two years ago because modern digital light meters also have Silicon Blue Cells, often 2 and are much quicker and simpler to operate, can read the light to 1/10th of a stop
Who on earth needs readings to 1/10 of a stop? and what could be quicker than the Weston's dial - meter, set arrow to appropriate setting, sorted.
You should also consider whether you plan to use the light meter in low light conditions.
No meter can be accurate at low light levels because you need to accommodate for reciprocity. For all my city night photography, I use the Weston to meter the brightest highlight, place it on Zone VIII and then apply the reciprocity factor. Using this method, I have never had a (technically) dud image.
Best,
David
www.dsallen.de
I only have 1 Weston the Weston Master II. I don't want to comment on its accuracy but the its dial is quite difficult to use. I have a hard time setting the film speed and read the aperture/shutter speed due to the way the numerals are painted on the dial. I found that the dial on the Minolta view meter 9 which is similar but much easier to use.
Hi Chan Tran,
Yes all of the Weston meters up to and including the Weston III have fussy dials - a classic case of too much information (you also need to be aware of the fact that, up to and including the Weston III, the settings are for Weston film speeds not ASA/ISO so you have to choose a speed that is one third of a stop slower when setting the speed of modern films on these meters. The Weston IV onwards use ASA/ISO ratings). However, their selenium cells do not deteriorate. The dials on the Weston V and Euro-Master are a huge improvement but it is (theoretically at least) possible for their selenium cells to deteriorate. It is for this reason that I keep my Weston III as my 'standard' to check newer meters against but use a Weston V with a Zone system for daily use.
Best,
David
www.dsallen.de
Yes all of the Weston meters up to and including the Weston III have fussy dials - a classic case of too much information (you also need to be aware of the fact that, up to and including the Weston III, the settings are for Weston film speeds not ASA/ISO so you have to choose a speed that is one third of a stop slower when setting the speed of modern films on these meters. The Weston IV onwards use ASA/ISO ratings). However, their selenium cells do not deteriorate. The dials on the Weston V and Euro-Master are a huge improvement but it is (theoretically at least) possible for their selenium cells to deteriorate. It is for this reason that I keep my Weston III as my 'standard' to check newer meters against but use a Weston V with a Zone system for daily use.
Best,
David
www.dsallen.de
I also have a Western Euro master that I've had for about twenty five years that is also retired to my sock draw, I don't think you understand that you can set modern digital meters to read the light to the nearest 1/10th of a stop, 1/2 stop or full stop, you can also set them so the reading is aperture priority,shutter speed priority or in EV, these meters are also flash meters and the reason they read 1/10th of a stop is modern studio flashes output power can can be adjusted in 1/10 of a stop increments.
I fully understand how digital meters work:
I just question the need for readings in 1/10 stop for normal analogue photography
At a single glance, the Weston dial shows you all of the possible shutter/aperture combinations and EV without having to press any buttons, etc. It therefore provides for aperture priority, shutter priority, EV, Zone system, etc.
Back in 1985, when I worked at the National Gallery making 10 x 8 reference transparencies, transparencies for books, infra-red, B&W, ultra-violet, x-ray photos of the collection, our Ellinchrome flash system had continuously variable light output. Even then, our flash meters were more than adequate for purpose.
I am not trying to convince anyone that they should use the same equipment as I do (god wouldn't that be boring) rather I was responding to the OP's original question and suggesting that Westons were a good (and now cheap) option for a replacement light meter.
At the end of the day the most important quality of a light meter is that it is totally consistent and the photographer has the ability to interpret the results that it provides to achieve the images that they want. For my personal needs I find digital light meters overly complicated and expensive.
Best,
David
www.dsallen.de
Last edited by a moderator:
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |