I have the same problem you do, Brian, with my meters. Aiming them correctly is the problem. A little this way or that, and the readings are different. That could be the OP's problems as well.
I have the same problem you do, Brian, with my meters. Aiming them correctly is the problem. A little this way or that, and the readings are different. That could be the OP's problems as well.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: 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.
I said in the earlier post that he should have the first calibrated to an accurate standard. Then calibrate the others to the first.
I have the same problem you do, Brian, with my meters. Aiming them correctly is the problem. A little this way or that, and the readings are different. That could be the OP's problems as well.
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 think all light meters must be able to calibrate some how but I wouldn't know how to access the calibration adjustments. Also some newer meter would be calibrated via software and thus you need the software which is not available to the user.
Plus, you'd need a calibrated light source... something most of use will never have. Calibration is a laboratory procedure.
It's a fair assumptionn that all meters are adjustable and were either directly calibrated or verified against a calibrated meter at some point in their original life. Getting details for repair/calibration of light meters is not nearly as easy as getting similar information about cameras and lenses.
That's why I always promote the practical approach of testing with actual photographic images and stipulating that if the image is good then the meter is good enough too. (Others may not agree...)
I understand you. Perhaps I should have used the word “exposure” rather than “image”. But some might quibble that also.
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.
What a predicament!
I compared incident light readings between 2 of my meters, a Sekonic L-558 and Gossen LunaPro SBC and found a 1/3 stop discrepancy, with the Gossen being lower. Both give me excellent images so I feel okay about using either indiscriminately.
But I’m not going to spot meter a gtay card with the Sekonic. Couldn’t bear getting bad news like you did.
Hope you figure it out soon!
If you fill frame with gray card and shoot the incident meter reading settings. Then shoot the card on automatic. Do the two digital shots match?
Which exposure put the histogram where you expected?
Which exposure put the histogram where you expected?
I'll stick to the sun; the only consistent light source we all have access to.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?