• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Not matching light meter values


The only issue with that is, the old Sekonic reads more EV than the new Sekonic. There is 30 years difference between both
 

Where do you get a 12.5 % grey card?
 
Alan Edward Klein said:
In practice. Calibrate one professionally and then adjust the other two to it.
Click to expand...

Who does light meter calibration? How does one “adjust” other than noting the deviation?

In the given situation, wouldn’t it be just as good to take 2 exposures, one per each meter, and see if there is any practical difference?
 
bluechromis said:
Where do you get a 12.5 % grey card?
Click to expand...

The right value might be 12.7% but I don't think there is anything commercially available. There's a 12.7% patch on the Sekonic gray card (see post #17). But you are expected to use an 18% gray card in practice.

For calibrating meters you are expected to use a transilluminated panel.


I am having a devil of a time calibrating my Weston Master II meters and my attitude changes daily how I am going to deal with it. Some days I want to print a new scale. Other days I want to use a fly-tying jig to wrap a hundred more winds of wire to the D'Arsonval coil. Other days I want to find the right color temperature for the standard.

I have been able to increase the meter's response to the same brightness by increasing the voltage to a tungsten light source. This both increases the color temperature of the source and generates more infrared. I think the most likely source of the increase is the increased infrared.

For the standard light source, there's a project by Serhiy Rozum where he uses an LED source. He says on his Github site, that the Selenium cell meters read off 1 stop "exactly".... this is from his site:


----
Because of the Color Correction Factor of LED, old light meters like selenium meters, photoresistors or LDR, and some photodiodes read exactly 1 stop lower. More modern light meters, including digital cameras, read LED lights correctly.

Big thanks to Peter Woodford who did numerous tests and helped to identify behaviour of various light meters.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Has anyone pointed out that some meters have filters installed, pre-manufacture or third party, after-market adjustments or tweaking?
 

One who owns a watch knows exactly what time it is; someone with two watches can never be sure.
 
To start with, I have no idea how to calibrate both Sekonics and it might be above my skill set.

I guess the best course of action for the time being would be, shoot the gray card with the measured settings for each lightmeter and compare the result. At the end of the day, this is pretty much what we do with the film as well, shooting through a step wedge and see if our processing is correct.
 

Yes where are the adjustment for calibration on these meters?
 
Sometimes the dome got old (yellowed, cloudy, or less transparent) as the aged. It is the problem from the white plastic degeneration.

If the reading is 1/4 stop of less then I won't brother. Otherwise I would look for another dome and try
 
kl122002 said:
Sometimes the dome got old (yellowed, cloudy, or less transparent) as the aged. It is the problem from the white plastic degeneration.

If the reading is 1/4 stop of less then I won't brother. Otherwise I would look for another dome and try
Click to expand...

As mentioned before, issue is the old Sekonoc shows higher EV than the new one and there is an age difference of 30 years at least between them. The difference is only 0.5EV I’ll shoot a gray card to compare. The most likely explanation I have at the moment is, the old Sekonic has much much larger dome and probably collects more lifht from different angles. We will see, Royal Mail has not delivered that card yet
 
bluechromis said:
Where do you get a 12.5 % grey card?
Click to expand...

K isn't about reflectance. It's an exposure constant that factors in various elements that determine how much light strikes the film plane. If the exposure equation only uses f/stop and shutter speed (and film speed), the amount of exposure reaching the film plane or sensor will be lower than the equation predicts. K contains most of the variables as q, which is part of the camera exposure equation, but it includes variables associated with the exposure meter. Through the lens metering measures the actual amount of light entering the camera through the optical system. Hand held exposure meters need to assume average values.

1.16 is in cd/ft2. To convert to cd/m2, 1.16 * 10.76 = 12.48 or 12.5 cd/m2



Camera exposure equation:


OP: Meters need to be calibrated from time to time.
 
Last edited:

Calibrating the 308
I knew someone who had an L-28C2. There is a dial on the back that you can turn with a coin, to zero out the metre. Does the 28C have something similar?
 
Andrew O'Neill said:
Calibrating the 308
I knew someone who had an L-28C2. There is a dial on the back that you can turn with a coin, to zero out the metre. Does the 28C have something similar?
Click to expand...

Yes it has a screw but that is to make the reading zero, not to calibrate to my understanding. Because certainly it is zero when there is absolutely no light. I have checked few videos, to calibrate L-28c, I need to fully open and expose some circuity to adjust, which I really dont want to do. OTOH calibrating 308X is very easy so I hope it the one which shows the slightly off reading
 
You're supposed to cover your hand over the dome. If the needle does not go to zero, then the dial is turned so that the needle points to zero. I guess that is how that particular metre is calibrated . I would probably just use the 308. My L-588 is super easy to calibrate in the field.
 

Yes, in fact to make sure there is no light, I made that adjustment under a dark cloth just in case my hand transmit some amount of light.

Where is that gray card now??? C'mon Royal Mail, end this mystery please.
 

That is a zero-adjust procedure, not a calibration per se. Calibration adjusts a meter to a known and accepted standard. See post #13, please.

... and post #35 is worth re-reading, too, as it somewhat validates your conclusion... whether you have a L-588 or a L-558 (or any other collection of light meters).
 
Last edited:
BrianShaw said:
Who does light meter calibration? How does one “adjust” other than noting the deviation?

In the given situation, wouldn’t it be just as good to take 2 exposures, one per each meter, and see if there is any practical difference?
Click to expand...

The OP says he's getting a half-stop difference in readings. Assuming one's right, the others off half a stop. Of course, calibration won't help him if he's misusing the meters.
 
Alan Edward Klein said:
The OP says he's getting a half-stop difference in readings. Assuming one's right, the others off half a stop. Of course, calibration won't help him if he's misusing the meters.
Click to expand...

No doubt; a very true statement about the importance to correctly use meters, especially when of different designs. But don't assume that only one is off as both could be off by 1/4 stop in the same direction.

Case in point about correct usage: I happily used Weston meters in a vertical position until I compared the readings with a "better and more modern" meter. Then discoverred that the corrrect position fo using a Weson meter is in the horizontal postiion, and a map of the acceptance pattern proved that my "incorrect reading" were because of that. Using that specific Weston meter became much more in agreement with the "modern meter" when the erroneous use was corrected. Truth be told, though... the minor difference in exposure recommendation was rather insignificant to practical image making.
 
Last edited:
Chan Tran said:
How do you calibrate the 2 meters the OP has (assuming you have the light standard)
Click to expand...

If there's no way to calibrate, then he'll have to offset the ISO setting by the amount of error in the meter's reading. He should check dark, medium, and light conditions to verify the readings are linear. You could get accurate readings under one lighting condition but not another.
 

I said in the earlier post that he should have the first calibrated to an accurate standard. Then calibrate the others to the first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register