OT: The ultimate Zone System camera?

[stuart_richardson]

I have been reading the Negative for the first time, learning about the zone system. In the

course of this, I went out and did some photography with my T90, and I think this camera

may be uniquely suited to the zone system. I am not sure however, as I have not used an

SLR of more modern vintage, so they may do the same... <P> In any case, the T90 has a

function for multi spot metering. You find the area you want a light reading for, and press

a small button near the shutter release and it places an arrow next to that exposure on a

little backlit match-needle like scale. You can do this up to five times. This gives you the

unique (at least in my small experience) ability to see not only the actual meter readings

for each area of the subject, but also a visual correlation between the points in the

finder...almost like match needle metering with a needle for each area of the image. I have

not tried this extensively with the zone system in mind, but it has always worked well for

me intuitively...especially for difficult exposures. Well, here is the old T90 performance

book's description of it. Surely better than mine: http://www.canonfd.com/t90perf/

page96.htm <P>

Is this a feature that is unique to the T90 (not just the multi spot metering, but the visual

representation of it), or am I just completely ignorant of modern camera design (probably

more likely)?

[awahlster]

Actually the T90 has the ability to average up to 9 spot meter readings. I have three of them. This while interesting would have been better suited to the Canon FD forum then one dedicated to Leica and Rangefinder type photography. Another place that would welcome your input would be the Canon FD group on Yahoo at:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CanonFD/

 

1150+ Canon FD nuts all in one basket.

[stuart_richardson]

That is why I put an OT there. The reason I posted it here is because I think that Leica

photographers seem to be the ones most likely to choose the Zone system (at least

outside of medium and large format). I don't mean this as a slight to rangefinder

photography in any way. I find myself using my Leica far more often than my FD system

lately. That does not mean I don't love both...

[dzeanah]

I believe the Olympus OM4 does the same, and there's at least one Hasselblad camera that might be (arguably) better suited for zone system work.

 

I believe the 8-meg Olympus 8080 digicam also does multi-spot metering.

[gary_ferguson1]

How has the zone system become tangled up with roll film photography?

 

The ultimate zone system camera is just about anything that feeds you negatives one sheet at a time, so that you can develop them with individual love and attention, as opposed to dunking them in a bath of ID-11 with their thirty-five brothers and sisters.

[EricM]

bulk rolling Gary, bulk rolling...

[dzeanah]

Either that or multiple cameras/backs...

[stuart_richardson]

ok ok ok, the ultimate 35mm zone system camera OR, the ultimate in camera meter for

use with the zone system. Interesting to hear of the other cameras with this capability

though.

[dougmiles]

I agree, Gary... a 35mm camera with 36-exp roll is pretty inappropriate for zone system process, though a built-in spot meter is nice. Especially an RF camera apt for dynamic situations. Maybe a medium format rollfilm camera with multiple backs, each back's roll destined for a certain development treatment later. But sheet film is most appropriate, where each sheet can get individualized treatment, even to the point of extra agitation by finger for certain areas of the sheet.

[al_kaplan1]

Dang it, Gary! Now you've figured out why I never leave the house with less than 7 M bodies! Seriously, I find that with 99% of 35mm photography I'm best off using an incident light meter.

[erik_gould1]

I always thought that the OM-3/OM-4 cameras with their meters were quite well

suited to the zone system, and it seemed to me the T90 as well, although I never

owned one of those. as for dealing with the N+, N- rolls, the Rollei 3003 type

cameras had interchangeable backs, but I have to say the 3003 was a disaster in

other ways, so I wouldn't recomend looking for one.

[tom_duffy1]

The zone system is not particularly applicable to 35mm except in its most basic form, "Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights".

As has been observed, it's most applicable to sheet film - individual shots get specific exposure and development based on the contrast of the scene. a partial workaround would be to carry 2 cameras, one for low contrast scenes and one for high contrast scenes. If you are really interested, David Vestal had an article in some of the older Leica manuals (15th edition has it for sure), published by Morgan and Morgan, entitled the Zone system for 35mm.

[nick roberts]

1. Roger Hicks is right about the Zone System.

2. The Rollei 3003 wasn't a disaster - the SL2000F was.

3. The OM4 was the first multi-spot metering camera.

4. The EOS 3 and 1V (both current models) have multi-spot metering.

 

Yes, multi-spot metering can help you get an acceptable exposure across several subject areas, but in using it you're using common sense, not trying to use the absurd Zone System.

[________1]

If you use an incident meter *and* bracket, how can you possibly fail to achive one optimum exposure? For 35mm I always thought the zone stuff was a waste of time, exposure wise.

[stuart_richardson]

I am not saying I am a Zone system convert, as I still don't retain half of what he is going

on about in the book, and I often shoot slides, which makes the system very different, if

applicable at all. That said, I find it very useful to use multi-spot metering to figure out my

exposure. For you incident meter people, how do you get an accurate exposure when you

are not in the same light as your subject (assuming it is a dynamic or distant subject that

you cannot just go up to). Do you just guess based on experience?

[lachaine]

The ideal camera for this, as far as I'm concerned, is one that doesn't get in my way (no matter what format it is), ie. all manual, nothing in the viewfinder except the scene I'm photographing, and not even a meter. It's pretty miserable to try and use the zone system without using a separate, handheld spotmeter. I like to just set the camera, whatever format, on the tripod, set-up for the subject I want, and then I like to meter separately.

[lee_shively]

Ansel bracketed.

[graham_morriss2]

Have to agree with derek I have studied the zone system very carefully and am a firm believer but i only use it (properly) with my medium format slr (I have six backs loaded with the same film and labelled n,n+1,n+2,n+3,n-1,n-2) or with my large format camera (a diy view camera adapted from an old speed graphic)using a spot meter, I find myself using semi zone system techniques with my 35mm rangefinder and my 35mm slr but to use the zone system properly individual development is a must have you got (and do you carry) six T90's!!!! p.s I still bracket!!!!!!!!

[tito sobrinho]

If your camera takes 7-8 spot reading of a scene and averages, it is not ZS. I can do that with my Weston V lightmeter and or my Luna Pro F SBC.

 

The article concerning ZS for the 35mm user, in the Leica Manual 15th edition, which was written by A.Adams. David Vestal was and still is leery of the ZS.

 

I attended an A.Adams workshop in the early '70s and never heard the word "bracketing". What he used to do, was to take 2 pictures of the same scene using the same settings. He feared that one 8x10 negative might have dust or a defect on the film, hense ruining a good exposure.

 

Years ago, I bought Davis' "Beyond the Zone System". I gave it back because he recommended the use of an incident lightmeter. As it was mentioned before, you have to walk up to several points of interest in order to measure the light.

 

Please read the little book Zone VI Workshop by the late Fred Picker. It is a good start concerning the intricacies of the ZS.

[stuart_richardson]

I don't always take the camera's word for it...if I use 5-7 spots for information, I don't

always take the average. The nice thing about the interface is that it gives you a visual

correlation, so if you want to set middle gray higher or lower, it is fairly easy to figure out.

[nesrani]

It all sounds very confusing. Better to just take a single reading with an in-camera meter and take the picture. Getting good exposures isn't magic.

 

I would have thought that photoshop made all the zone system stuff pretty irrelevant.

[stuart_richardson]

I may not have learned much in a year and a half of photography, but if there is one thing I

have learned it is that there is no substitute for a properly exposed picture, especially with

slide film.

[christian hilmersen www.]

Bracketing does not solve all exposure problems as stated above! If you only bracket you only use the first part of the zone system - it does not change the films range.

 

What I have found works quite well is to expose for middle-grey and develop the film according to the general light conditions on the day I took the pictures: it suits 35mm photography quite well.

 

The T90 is a great camera BTW.

[lee_shively]

This really isn't hard stuff. Exposure errors, film latitude, temperature variations of chemicals and thermometers, variations in shutter speeds of cameras and apertures of lenses, voltage fluctuations when using enlargers, variations in the lots of photographic paper--Jesus, this could drive you crazy if you are inclined to being obsessive/compulsive! Just bracket and don't worry about it.

[bob haight]

Regardless of what you shoot, all scenes have areas of varying intensites of light. To be able to meter an area of a scene which is important to you and then compensate so that it is rendered naturally on film is all the Zone system is about. People do it anyway by metering off their hand and closing down or whatever other tricks they have. All the Zone system does is allow you to visualize how you want to render an area and compensate accordingly. Whether you choose to push or pull individual sheets or roll film is irrelevant to correct placement of light values which is helpful to achieving a good negative or slide, regardless of where you go from there.