Why are spot meters so expensive?

Helge said:

It could probably be a fun and doable project to build a LED version of the SEI Exposure Photometer.
http://www.seiphotometer.net/
You probably don’t need the mini telescope and the battery and LED would simplify things immensely.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking on the lines of converting a scrap slr. Drill a hole in the mirror and have an led behind it. Getting enough range might be a problem. The SEI is about 20 stops and the slr lens, (in stop down mode,) is 7 or 8 stops. A variable nd filter can add another 7 or 8 stops. Maybe a fixed nd in addition but that is less user friendly. The led could be modulated but by 7 stops or more?

I disagree that spotmeters are expensive, try one of these, a precision instrument in near mint condition complete with soft case, manual, batteries (that last forever) they are easy and a pleasure to use https://www.ebay.com/itm/Pentax-spo...m34083397d0:g:R4gAAOSwlvNcq7vj&frcectupt=true

I agree with the folk who point out that economies of scale that make for $200 flat screen TVs and smartphones don't apply to photographic spotmeters. I also agree with those who point out the need for custom optical components. The OP, in my opinion, is displaying poor grasp of what is involved in making and selling things and might learn from the advice of those who have seen the inside of a factory, the inside of a cell-phone, and the inside of a spotmeter.

We should not overlook that aside of handheld spot meters there were meter attachments to meter at the focal plane, again as spot metering. These were sold too. There were professional photographers with LF transparencies who wanted/needed each detail exposed precisely.

And we shoud not overlook that cameras still offer spotmetering too.
At the T90 with 135mm lens that yields 1°metering. And I have not read someone bickering about this feature.

AgX said:

We should not overlook that aside of handheld spot meters there were meter attachments to meter at the focal plane, again as spot metering. These were sold too. There were professional photographers with LF transparencies who wanted/needed each detail exposed precisely.

And we shoud not overlook that cameras still offer spotmetering too.
At the T90 with 135mm lens that yields 1°metering. And I have not read someone bickering about this feature.

Click to expand...

The reason people don't bicker about the T90 spot meter is that many people do not have the skill to use such a spot meter effectively, which is also the same as that used in the EOS 1N!

The spot meter in the T90 has the major weakness of being a one point comparative meter e.g. it does not add nor average any number of spots like the OM 4 with its multispot+averaging, hi/lo bias method. Similiarly, the EOS 1N spot meter is not that particularly useful because of the lack of additive+averaging function; it is simply for comparitive purposes of adjacent zones of contrast, and this weakness does not detract anything at all from the enormous capability of the onboard metering matrices of that camera.

A handheld spot (e.g. the L758D and others from Sekonic; there are others) takes this accumulation and averaging several steps further by allowing one to determine how the averaging is determined e.g. additive or subtractive, mean-weighted or average weighted and where to put the weighting (first or last spot) relative to the midpoint, and neither will give precisely the same result in specific conditions.

I am not troubled by the cost of spot meters, with my second L758D a daily workhorse (the first one drowned in the briney in 2013 when I slipped off a rock!). Currently an L758D is around $566 online, sometimes double that in street retailers (!). They are a sophisticated piece of engineering and very accurate when used competently and knowledgeably. Many meters, not strictly Sekonic's, do not have anything near the hallowed 18% grey baseline setting. The L758D is by intentional design, 12.6% incident and 16.2% reflected spot. In practice neither of these figures are of any consequence.

Poisson Du Jour said:

The spot meter in the T90 has the major weakness of being a one point comparative meter e.g. it does not add nor average any number of spots like the OM 4 with its multispot+averaging, hi/lo bias method.

Click to expand...

At the T90 up to 8 spot meterings can be averaged.

Averaging is one use for spot-metering, but "placing" a certain luminance value at the exposure scale is another major use.
Here the the T90 acts exactly as the Profisix handheld meter by similar nulling scale.

Also keep in mind that a new spot meter wouldn't be competing against a Pentax digital or Sekonic. Those have a reputation in the field already. It would be competing against meters like a Soligor digital, which are actually really nice meters and quite cheap. I paid $20 for one and sold another for $60.

There are companies with the resources to do this. Companies that already have access to the components and optics (the optics thing is being overplayed) that can be repurposed for an easy profit. I think the problem is that, although the profit would motivate many startups to do it, startups don't have the catalog of hardware and patents, so it's a different, more expensive game for them. And what seems like a motivating profit for startups is not a significant enough profit for the big companies who work in revenues dozens of times larger.

Any camera company could use some of their unused warehouse space (that they now have thanks to the explosion of phone cameras) and use it to assemble a spot meter. All they would really need is a new chassis for the device. They could sell it for $200 and still make well over 100% profit. Even still, the profit would barely show up in their overall revenue.

So maybe those with the resources to turn a profit aren't interested, and those who are interested, don't have the resources.

I don't know... I've seen much more ridiculous ideas get funding on Kickstarter.

Jim, if you run across another $20 spot meter and you don't want it, please let me know.

I suppose the use of an optical system for viewing (glass lenses accurately set in place) bumps up the cost of a spot meter.

Whoops -- that has been overplayed. Sorry.

Love my PDS Meter. Would not be without it. Sunny 16 doesn't work where I play.

MattKing said:

Do you believe in irony?
I ask, because in 50+ years of photography, I've never owned one or really used one - before today.
And I'm on my second set of the Ansel Adams trilogy.
I have known a lot more people who have the Ansel Adams books than I've known users of spot meters.
I have friends who are Zone System users who use spot meters, but almost none of the experienced and knowledgeable photographers I have known use them.
The irony is, a couple of weeks ago I found one (a Pentax Spotmeter V) at a favourable price in a thrift store and I bought it. I then located (about a thousand miles away) a replacement for the missing battery cap and just today took it out to try it.
I do have cameras with quasi-spot meter functions in them, and I do have somewhere a Gossen 10 degree attachment for a Luna Pro, but a true spot meter - I'm not sure whether I'll continue to use it.
I'm a big fan of using incident meters.

Click to expand...

Matt, Did not buy a spot meter tell after they banned mercury cell batt, all ways used Gossen Luna Pro, life was simpler back then but have a Pentex dig. spot meter now and like it.

My new to me Asahi Pentax Spotmeter V uses silver oxide 357 batteries.

I have a Minolta Spotmeter M I bought in the 1980s. When I started up film again last year, I started using it. It stopped working. Probably around $80 to fix, and I will eventually do it. Went to a Gossen SBC Lunapro. Was working well. Dropped it about 4" onto concrete- stopped working! The dial does not appear coupled to the meter anymore. Now I am using my old Gossen Luna Pro with a Wein cell.

Luckless said:

Do you have around $2mill pocket change to make that bet?

Click to expand...

An obvious Kickstarter.
Anyone shooting a manual and/old camera would welcome a new and serviceable device with those three functions.

MattKing said:

Most people don't use spot meters.
Most people who do use spot meters don't switch meters.
In almost 10 years of working in the retail camera trade in the 1970s and 1980s I never had a customer ask for a spot meter, and only one (maybe two) of the stores I worked in carried them.
Those stores included stores that sold Leica and Hasselblad and Mamiya medium format equipment.
I see more evidence of them being sold now then I ever saw back in the heyday of film camera sales.

Click to expand...

+1, in the full service stores where I worked in the 50s and 60s, spot meters were "special order" items. Today, the stores no longer exist so "spot meters" must be ordered here from the East or West coasts. Times have changed for everyone who doesn't live in a large city. I bought my spot meter from Zone VI and they no longer exist.. I won't buy another as long as this one works and as long as it can be repaired. Or until I cease to exist..............Regards!

I have not seen any lightmeter in any camera store for years, except for used ones.

Could a smart phone be used as a spot meter?

Zoom into the pic and use a cursor to select areas to read. Maybe feed in an incident light reading first if that would make it more accurate.

John51 said:

Could a smart phone be used as a spot meter?

Zoom into the pic and use a cursor to select areas to read. Maybe feed in an incident light reading first if that would make it more accurate.

Click to expand...

The IOS app Pocket Light Meter works a little like this. Just tap the screen where you want to take the reading.

Vaughn said:

I suppose the use of an optical system for viewing (glass lenses accurately set in place) bumps up the cost of a spot meter.

Whoops -- that has been overplayed. Sorry.

Love my PDS Meter. Would not be without it. Sunny 16 doesn't work where I play.

Click to expand...

Vaughn, the reason I say it is overplayed is because plastic lenses are every bit as good as glass, except for scratch resistance, so that is not a big cost factor.

But I get it - me saying it is "overplayed" probably came across in a way I didn't intend. So I'm sorry if I offended.

I'm just thinking out loud wishfully, anyway.

Ariston said:

Vaughn, the reason I say it is overplayed is because plastic lenses are every bit as good as glass, except for scratch resistance, so that is not a big cost factor...

Click to expand...

No offence taken. But I must disagree about the statement above. Scratches on the lens, cleaning marks, etc, would drastically reduce the useful lifespan of the meter. Flare must be carefully controlled. We are talking about equipment built to be used for a lifetime, with care, of course. I paid $400 for my almost-new Pentax Digital Zone VI Modified Spotmeter in the late 80s (I was helping out a student and I needed one, so not a bargin). Still using it 30+ years later, so under $13 per year for a perfect meter. Might be able to bring that down under $10 a year if I keep healthy.

Vaughn said:

No offence taken. But I must disagree about the statement above. Scratches on the lens, cleaning marks, etc, would drastically reduce the useful lifespan of the meter. Flare must be carefully controlled. We are talking about equipment built to be used for a lifetime, with care, of course. I paid $400 for my almost-new Pentax Digital Zone VI Modified Spotmeter in the late 80s (I was helping out a student and I needed one, so not a bargin). Still using it 30+ years later, so under $13 per year for a perfect meter. Might be able to bring that down under $10 a year if I keep healthy.

Click to expand...

If a known player in the industry released a $50 modern 1 degree spot meter with a plastic lens, I would happily buy it, and use it, and replace it if I ever managed to be careless enough to scratch the optics (which I assume would be well hooded).

With care and attention, something I would expect to give my light meters anyway, there is little reason to worry about damage to a light meter, but it would be far easier to replace than dropping something that cost nearly a grand based on inflation.

Ariston said:

the reason I say it is overplayed is because plastic lenses are every bit as good as glass, except for scratch resistance, so that is not a big cost factor.

Click to expand...

What??
No, it is not. Where are you cherry-picking these unqualified statements from?
Modern day spot meters use multicoated glass at both ends to deal with reflections (many also have dioptric correction lenses built into them), and most again have a threaded front to take a filter (e.g. Sekonic L758D has a 40mm thread) and/or soft or rigid hood e.g. spot meters can take a polariser, 81B or other filters instead of manually entering the FF into the meter). As Vaughan mentioned, scratches on plastic would quite rightly reduce the useful lifespan of the meter, secondary to the main problem of making viewing an irritation rather than something one needs to concentrate on, and introducing flare in specific lighting situations. There is a big and very noticeable difference between squinting through a plastic lens compared to a corrected, multicoated lens that is specifically designed for the purpose and not as an afterthought.

Luckless said:

With care and attention, something I would expect to give my light meters anyway, there is little reason to worry about damage to a light meter, but it would be far easier to replace than dropping something that cost nearly a grand based on inflation.

Click to expand...

You wish.
Could be true thought for people living in a mollycoddled bubble who never venture out of the front garden poking around the roses, but for people active outdoors every day in adventure and endeavour, damage will come and go, unseen or unplanned (sometimes both!) as part of daily life, no different to your car being hit by hailstones on a seemingly beautiful blue-sky day. Shit happens.

Really, damage to a light meter is very common. Broken invercones, or sun damage to invercones (resulting in spuriously inaccurate readings) are two very, very common types of damage - a broken invercone is easily replaced in-field, but a damaged and blighted cell behind the invercone is a much more serious set back. Light meters are an investment, and precision measuring instruments with high quality glass lenses to be used with care — something I drum into my workshop participants when they first come to grips with an L758D — intimidating as it looks, it really is not, an 40mm UV filters are placed on these (loaned) meters for the duration of the workshops. My first L758D drowned when I tumbled into the briney interstate in 2011. Having to rely on the TTL meter of a Pentax 67 was eye-opening, and shows just how much better and more refined a skilled application of a light meter is by comparison. But it seems few people will see that, they're more interested in pennies and plastic!

BTW, spot/multispot/incident meters use two separate, independent meters, calibrated to that specific and very, very accurately to the angle of the meter. That spot would be quite difficult to view if the optics was plastic, to say nothing of those wearing glasses that would see chroma and fuzz. Thinking that somebody, somewhere, will come up with a $50 spot meter with plastic lenses defeats the purpose at the starting gate (economics does not permit you to pay a tiny bit and get a lot!), and such a meter would only hazard accuracy rather than attest to it.

Whoops -- got the wrong decade on my light meter...got my first one in the 80s, but it got stolen and my present one was bought in mid 90's...so only 25 years old.

Ain't going to happen, of course (a $50 spot meter). I operate differently when it comes to being a consumer...buy dependability/usability/longevity, and buy once. Go without until the cash can be saved. I tend to photograph in interesting locations/conditions. My present lightmeter went swimming in Cascade Creek below Yosemite Valley -- it was it or my 8x10. But I fished it out pretty quick, took out the battery and gave it a week or so to dry out (I was on my way out of the Valley and heading home). Still works fine. Winds on top of sand dunes, rains in Chile, 110F at Dry Falls, WA, 18F in Spokane, WA, out in the middle of nowhere in Argentina and Death Valley, in the Yolla Bolly Mtns, Zion, of course some crazy places in the redwoods, and whereever else I have been in the last 25 years the meter has held up and performed.

I'd have to get a case of $50 spot meters... I take an extra when I can -- a Pentax Spot Meter V (non-digital read-out) -- cause it is a pretty important piece of equipment.

My Pentax V Digital Spot Meter cost about $275US plus $80US for calibration. It came with a plastic belt holder, but I bought a strong cloth belt holder and then a leather one.

Poisson Du Jour said:

You wish.
Could be true thought for people living in a mollycoddled bubble who never venture out of the front garden poking around the roses, but for people active outdoors every day in adventure and endeavour, damage will come and go, unseen or unplanned (sometimes both!) as part of daily life, no different to your car being hit by hailstones on a seemingly beautiful blue-sky day. Shit happens.

Click to expand...

Ignoring half a statement and claiming it is false really doesn't present your reading comprehension in all that great of light...

I have carried far far more delicate instruments than a photographic spot meter through some of the roughest brush in Canada, and yet manage to not break any of it. If you manage to bash a light meter against a rock, then that would suggest that you weren't applying the 'care and attention' part of the statement. If you had been applying actual care and attention, then the bit with the rock bashing wouldn't have happened. (However, I'm the kind of person who can have a two year old smart phone without a case and no scratches on it... Mileage may vary for others. I have no idea how some of my friends manage to smash their otterboxed phones in less than half a year.)

Vaughn said:

No offence taken. But I must disagree about the statement above. Scratches on the lens, cleaning marks, etc, would drastically reduce the useful lifespan of the meter. Flare must be carefully controlled. We are talking about equipment built to be used for a lifetime, with care, of course. I paid $400 for my almost-new Pentax Digital Zone VI Modified Spotmeter in the late 80s (I was helping out a student and I needed one, so not a bargin). Still using it 30+ years later, so under $13 per year for a perfect meter. Might be able to bring that down under $10 a year if I keep healthy.

Click to expand...

Vaughan, I am already at $10.00 a year and counting for my Zone VI spot meter. I must say, it has certainly held-up better than I have............Regards!

Luckless said:

Ignoring half a statement and claiming it is false really doesn't present your reading comprehension in all that great of light...

Click to expand...

I address what I want, and no more than I wish.

Luckless said:

If you manage to bash a light meter against a rock, then that would suggest that you weren't applying the 'care and attention' part of the statement. If you had been applying actual care and attention, then the bit with the rock bashing wouldn't have happened.

Click to expand...

Again! Accidents do happen, and you are trying to tell me that "applying care and attention" would avoid them? Mate, all the care and attention the world won't allow you to live a charmed life. Come off the glue: it's a very unsophisticated, unworldly view.

Yes, people screw and fuck up mobiles like they are something (my RA-4 print techie has a mobile with a badly fractured screen caused by dropping it into the toilet!) bought at the corner store for a few dollars and should be treated with cavalier disdain. For the record, I have never smashed or lost a mobile phone, nor even damaged one — not even a scratch (maybe this is all because I commercially lease mobiles, not buy them, and return them at the end of term for "the next big thing").