Using an external meter by choice

[MattKing]

So in the analog only section, no discussion of digital light meters is allowed? That pretty much limits it to the little Sekonics and a Gossen, and out-of-production hand-held meters. Even film cameras have digital meters now, and have for a while.

I think you mis-read my post.
Discuss away, if discussion about the meter is relevant to the otherwise analog subject of the thread.
But if the meter itself is (or meters themselves are) the subject of the thread, the "Exposure Discussion" sub-forum seems particularly well suited, and it is a "Mixed Workflow" sub-forum.

 

[Zathras]

I called Samy's on Fairfax and they said for most older light meters they recommend Spectra City Meter Repair. Others they send to the manufacturers, but be sure to contact the repair place or Samy's first.

Thank you, I'll call both places and decide how to procced.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thank you, I'll call both places and decide how to procced.

You are welcome. No charge.

 

[wiltw]

Thank you, I'll call both places and decide how to procced.

You live in SF Bay Area...meet me somewhere and I can test your meter against 2 handheld and one in-camera meter, against an 18% grey target, and tell you if it devaates at all from meters which all give me dead on accurate exposure!

 

[Zathras]

You live in SF Bay Area...meet me somewhere and I can test your meter against 2 handheld and one in-camera meter, against an 18% grey target, and tell you if it devaates at all from meters which all give me dead on accurate exposure!

Hi Wilt,
The two meters are definitely off. I have a Luna Pro F and a Minolta Auto Meter III that are very accurate, as well a a new Sekonic meter that I just bought. These three meters all agree with each other, but my two Minolta Auto Meter IV-F models are different story. On one of them, I have to set the ASA two stops lower to agree with my good meters and the other requires that I set the ASA three stops lower. As you might imagine, I'm not exactly thrilled about this.

 

[wiltw]

Hi Wilt,
The two meters are definitely off. I have a Luna Pro F and a Minolta Auto Meter III that are very accurate, as well a a new Sekonic meter that I just bought. These three meters all agree with each other, but my two Minolta Auto Meter IV-F models are different story. On one of them, I have to set the ASA two stops lower to agree with my good meters and the other requires that I set the ASA three stops lower. As you might imagine, I'm not exactly thrilled about this.

OK, you have three 'standards' of your own, so you know what is 'off'. As for the Autometer IV-F...one possibility is that the switch which is activated by swaping reflective vs incident disks is not working properly...if you manually actuate the switch with no disks in place, it should cause the reading to adjust (switch-in vs. switch-out).. Unfortnately I do not recall what the change should be...I sold my Autometer IV-f for a V-f which does not use such a switch, so I cannot test with mine and tell you how much change in reading should occur. This is a pretty common point of failure.

 

[Pieter12]

Hi Wilt,
The two meters are definitely off. I have a Luna Pro F and a Minolta Auto Meter III that are very accurate, as well a a new Sekonic meter that I just bought. These three meters all agree with each other, but my two Minolta Auto Meter IV-F models are different story. On one of them, I have to set the ASA two stops lower to agree with my good meters and the other requires that I set the ASA three stops lower. As you might imagine, I'm not exactly thrilled about this.

You might try cleaing the meter' contacts in the measuring head. There should be a video on youtube, using a crisp dollar bill (the raised engraving ink acts as a mild abrasive) to clean the contacts. Worked for me.

 

[wiltw]

You might try cleaing the meter' contacts in the measuring head. There should be a video on youtube, using a crisp dollar bill (the raised engraving ink acts as a mild abrasive) to clean the contacts. Worked for me.

This link wrongly calls it 'calibrating', but it really is cleaning the contact so that oxidation no longer prevents the contacts from connecting!
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...ype=&tbs=#kpvalbx=_N8LgYYfnEMvLkPIP59mI8Ak119

To test, remove the incident dome and locate a spring-loaded pin beneath. The meter reading should be different when the pin is fully extended than when you push it into the housing. If there is no difference, the contacts need to be cleaned.

I found an old post of mine:

"On the Autometer IVf, there is a metal pin which is revealed when the hemisphere is removed. The pin is normally depressed by a raised surface on the underside of the black plastic ring around the white hemisphere. This same pin is NOT depressed by the reflected light attachment (hole in the center) black ring. The pin is actually a switch and it alters meter sensitivity and readings.​

It sometimes occurs that the pin/switch stops functioning, so that the white hemisphere presses on the pin but the switch does not alter the readings. Sometimes, if the pin/switch stops functioning correctly, if you merely press and release the pin multiple times it starts working again (oxidation on the contacts of the switch?!?!). In other cases, it was necessary to send it to Minolta repair to have the switch replaced. My own Autometer IVf meter acted up a couple of times, and pressing and releasing the pin multiple times would fix it."​

 

[Bill Burk]

wiltw and Zathras, stop by here in Pacifica and I'll fire up my Kollmorgen light standard and you can check all them against a standard.

 

[BrianShaw]

wiltw and Zathras, stop by here in Pacifica and I'll fire up my Kollmorgen light standard and you can check all them against a standard.

NOW WE’RE TALKIN’

 

[wiltw]

wiltw and Zathras, stop by here in Pacifica and I'll fire up my Kollmorgen light standard and you can check all them against a standard.

Wow, a local boy! Gotta keep in mind the availabiliity of a test standard.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use the Pentax Digital Spot Meter and the Sekonic L-308S [Reflectance, Incident and Flash].

 

[Craig75]

So in the analog only section, no discussion of digital light meters is allowed? That pretty much limits it to the little Sekonics and a Gossen, and out-of-production hand-held meters. Even film cameras have digital meters now, and have for a while.

Yes you can it's just that Brad needs smelling salts if you do.

 

[faberryman]

Is the Pentax Digital Spotmeter a digital meter, or an analog meter with a digital display? If analog, is the digital display the offending characteristic?

Are the meters in film cameras which have LEDs and LCDs in the viewfinder analog or digital? If digital, can we discuss their metering characteristics in the analog section? The reason I ask is that I was sort of checking around and found this about the Nikon F4 metering system, which uses LCDs:

"As Matrix Metering demands a great deal of raw computing power to process complicating data analysis and at the time of its introduction, Nikon F4 can easily claim to have installed one of the most powerful on board computer processing circuitry in applied camera design. As a powerful system is required to instantly process various data pertaining to exposure metering, focus detection and mechanical parts control with stepless lens-body interface via super-fast computation - all aim to achieve one single photographic objective - outstandingly accurate exposure results."

I don't know, maybe they are talking about an analog computer or something. With a digital display.

As you may have gathered, I am perplexed by the moderator's most recent ruling on forum decorum. I don't want any self-described analog photographers to turn to stone or anything, but is this pronouncement a bridge too far?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is the Pentax Digital Spotmeter a digital meter, or an analog meter with a digital display? If analog, is the digital display the offending characteristic?

Are the meters in film cameras which have LEDs and LCDs in the viewfinder analog or digital? If digital, can we discuss their metering characteristics in the analog section? The reason I ask is that I was sort of checking around and found this about the Nikon F4 metering system, which uses LCDs:

"As Matrix Metering demands a great deal of raw computing power to process complicating data analysis and at the time of its introduction, Nikon F4 can easily claim to have installed one of the most powerful on board computer processing circuitry in applied camera design. As a powerful system is required to instantly process various data pertaining to exposure metering, focus detection and mechanical parts control with stepless lens-body interface via super-fast computation - all aim to achieve one single photographic objective - outstandingly accurate exposure results."

I don't know, maybe they are talking about an analog computer or something. With a digital display.

As you may have gathered, I am perplexed by the moderator's most recent ruling on forum decorum. I don't want any self-described analog photographers to turn to stone or anything, but is this pronouncement a bridge too far?

The Pentax Digital Spot Meter is a digital meter. There is a Pentax Spot Meter is an analog meter with an analog dial IIRC.

 

[abruzzi]

These days, the only reason I shoot 35mm is to get the built in meter. If I'm going to handhold a meter (Sekonic 308, Sekonic 508, and Minolta Spotmeter F) I'm going to shoot medium or large format. So to answer the original question--no, I don't handhold a meter with 35mm.

 

[wiltw]

The Pentax Digital Spot Meter is a digital meter. There is a Pentax Spot Meter is an analog meter with an analog dial IIRC.

Even a 'digital' camera sensor is an ANALOG device, each pixel whose signal is processed and goes thru and ANALOG-to-DIGITAL conversion.
Similarly, the light meter starts off with an analog signal generated via its photosensor, and that signal is amplified and interpreted to either drive a swinging needle or converted to drive a digital DISPLAY..

 

[Sirius Glass]

Even a 'digital' camera sensor is an ANALOG device, each pixel whose signal is processed and goes thru and ANALOG-to-DIGITAL conversion.
Similarly, the light meter starts off with an analog signal generated via its photosensor, and that signal is amplified and interpreted to either drive a swinging needle or converted to drive a digital DISPLAY..

As I posted IIRC, but in all fairness I have not disassembled my spot meter.

 

[wiltw]

As I posted IIRC, but in all fairness I have not disassembled my spot meter.

Every photosensor is a photoresistive device, or a photovoltaic device, and both have continuously variable values that result based upon the intensity of the light striking the photosensor. Continuously variablle, or analog

Of course, mirrorless camera metering is a different story.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Every photosensor is a photoresistive device, or a photovoltaic device, and both have continuously variable values that result based upon the intensity of the light striking the photosensor. Continuously variablle, or analog.

I was referring to the processing after the analog signal passes through the analog to digital converter.

 

[grat]

Even a 'digital' camera sensor is an ANALOG device, each pixel whose signal is processed and goes thru and ANALOG-to-DIGITAL conversion.
Similarly, the light meter starts off with an analog signal generated via its photosensor, and that signal is amplified and interpreted to either drive a swinging needle or converted to drive a digital DISPLAY..

So it belongs in the hybrid discussion area.

Got it.

Personally, I operate all of my cameras with my fingers. As they are digits, this means my cameras are all digitally operated, right?

 

[markjwyatt]

So it belongs in the hybrid discussion area.

Got it.

Personally, I operate all of my cameras with my fingers. As they are digits, this means my cameras are all digitally operated, right?

I would argue that film is more digital than digital.

Take monochrome: Digital presents 8 bits (jpeg) or 256 grey values per smallest unit of image (pixel): 1-256
Negative is either black or clear (1 or 0): digital

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Every photosensor is a photoresistive device, or a photovoltaic device, and both have continuously variable values that result based upon the intensity of the light striking the photosensor. Continuously variablle, or analog

Of course, mirrorless camera metering is a different story.

Why is it different? Doesn't each pixel sensor output an analog signal?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I would argue that film is more digital than digital.

Take monochrome: Digital presents 8 bits (jpeg) or 256 grey values per smallest unit of imase (pixel): 1-256
Negative is either black or clear (1 or 0): digital

Sure make you argument. You are entitled to have your opinion even though it is wrong. Whatever flows your boat or lets you sleep at night.

 

[drmoss_ca]

If I use more fingers on a camera where I manually focus, set aperture, and shutter speed, wind the film on and take off the lens cap (rather then press the power button, the internal lens cap opens, auto-exposure is set, auto-focus occurs, and then with a second touch of the same index finger I press the 'shutter' button), is not the first camera more 'digital'?
I know, I'm being silly. But sometimes silly people exist to point fun at silly rules. Probably doesn't apply here.

Still, it seems there is room for a discussion about choosing an external meter, especially with old film cameras that may have agëd and faulty internal meters. And even when they work as new, incident metering, or spot metering may be better than the built-in meter. I think using a digital camera as a reflective meter is interesting, and possibly quite flexible, especially when a tiny camera like the ancient Canon G9 is involved. I shall not discuss it here, as it is unwelcome. Ultimately, a good incident meter either outperforms all that bother, or gets to the same result with one press of a digit, rather than use of many digits, extending into the billions.