Selecting a handheld meter

[john_philllips]

I recently inherited a nice meterless 2.8C Rolleiflex and am shopping

for a handheld meter. There are numerous posts on the subject of

handheld meters, spot vs incident/reflected etc., but would

appreciate opinions on how pricy/sophisticated I need to get for

general outdoors/landscape type shooting. A friend has offered to

sell me a used Gossen Luna Pro for a good price. tx

[mark_brown2]

<p>So long as its accurate, a basic meter is all you actually <i>need</i>. Whether any fancy frills or attachments are worth it is down to what you want to use the meter for and personal choice. Do you want to do flash photography? You'll need a meter with flash capability. Want to use it in low light? An illuminated display that can be read in dim conditions and extra sensitivity might be worth having. Don't like to do feats of mental arithmetic? Get a meter that can average several readings. Need to take readings from awkward spots or from the film plane itself? Some meters have optional attachments available. The list goes on...</p>

 

<p>I once had a fancy Seikonic incident meter with built-in spotmeter, flash capability, averaging etc. but could never get to grips with interpreting the runes cast on the display properly and having to take my eye away from the sighthole every time I took a reading was profoundly awkward, so I sold it. I now use a Pentax Digital Spotmeter. No frills but simple, rugged, reliable and easy to use. Never looked back.</p>

[john_sonewald]

I have a Minolta Autometer III with the spot attachment, and a Gossen Luna Pro F. The Luna Pro F is a replacement for a standard Luna Pro, only because I needed the flash meter function. Both Luna Pro's are big, clunky looking, but great to use, simple, extremely fast, and very easy to read. You might think about buying a used one, using it to find out what you like or not, then selling it if you decide you want something different. They hold their value pretty well.

[mel_brown1]

All of Marks' points are excellent. I would add that both the Luna Pro and its younger sibling, the Luna Pro SBC, are incredibly intuitive to use. No other meter comes close to to their brilliant design. One difference between these two meters, however, is significant. The original Luna Pro used mercury cells, no longer available in the U.S. Workarounds are available, but are not an ideal solution. The later SBC model uses the cheap and ubiquitous rectangular 9V cell. The SBC model also has better low-light sensitivity. The Luna Pro F adds flash metering, but is a couple of steps less sensitive than the SBC.

 

All three of those meters do reflected and incident readings, but not spot readings, most useful for landscape shooting. There are meters that do it all, but will likely cost you $500+.

 

If the battery thing doesn't bother you, and the price is right (check eBay for comparison), go for the Luna Pro. You can then add a used Pentax spotmeter, also very easy to use, to your bag and still come in WAY under $500!

[miles_feigenbaum___dallas_]

here's a link to sekonics user site/forum...

 

http://www.macuserforums.com/webx?14@162.HAYpardDcXB^0@.ee70439

[frank_kimble]

A couple clarifications ref Mel's reply. Bogen can install a battery adapter for less than $20 bucks in the older Luna Pro's so that they use a standard battery. I'm not sure what he meant about the SBC being more sensitive. Both the Luna-Pro F and the SBC have the same Ambient measuring range, EV-4 to EV17.

[mel_brown1]

Frank noted that a battery adapter is available for the Luna Pro, but I maintain that workaround is less than ideal. It raises the cost to about that of an SBC, and you are better off with a meter that uses a standard 9V cell. Also, since I own both a Luna Pro SBC and a Luna Pro F, I can unequivocably say that the latter is less sensitive by at least two steps. I'm not absolutely sure of the numbers, but I seem to remember the published specs of the F has it bottoming out at -1 or -2, compared to the -4 of the SBC. No big deal, but there is definitely a difference.

 

John also slid his reply in just before mine, and I'd like to comment on that. I also have a similar Minolta meter, an Autoflash III. It works great and I do like it, but in my opinion, all digital meters share an unnatural, robotic, Frankenstein sort of feel.

 

Explaining that should be simple, but it is not. The best I can do is to say that with my Luna Pro SBC, I point, push, twist, and my exposure choices are instantly obvious. With my Minolta or any other digital meter, I point, push the button, then have to think about my exposure. The analog SBC is quicker and easier.

 

You have to experience this for yourself. Don't read specs or sales literature. Don't let me tell you which meter is best. Play with the Luna Pro for a few days, then if possible, try a digital meter for a few days. You will then know which is for you.

 

Logic would lead you to think that a digital meter is more rugged and consistent than one with a sensitive needle mechanism. My SBC once fell onto concrete from the hood of a moving car because I forgot it there while the car was still parked. No damage. When I bought my Flashmeter III (used), it looked like it had been dragged through a minefield. I sent it off for calibration, and it proved to be within 1/3 step before they adjusted it.

 

An annoying characteristic of meters is that, if you own two of them, they will not agree in all lighting conditions. If you have eight meters, you will get eight unpredictably different readings. Try to find just one meter that does what you need, and stick with it.

 

And why can't other digital flash meters do what my old Novatron digital flash meter can do? With it, I don't have to press a button on it to prep it for measuring the next flash. I pop the flash, and on its large, bright LED, it displays the aperture for a second or so, then is ready to read the next flash with no help from me. Any other meters have that capability? I think electronics designers should have to attend User Interface School!

[frank_bunnik]

I am using a Sekonic L408 meter for a couple of years now. It has a built in semi-spot meter, flash meter, incident light meter. I have almost always correctly exposed slides, maybe 1 in a 100 goes wrong but just because of my own mistake.

[allan_jamieson2]

Just in passing, I also have a Sekonic L408, which although

lightweight and easy to use is fairly poor in dim light, i.e. if you

wanted to photograph a floodlit building at dusk from some

distance, you would really be struggling.

 

I've often ended up having to guess exposures, which isn't really

ideal. Also the spot metering function isn't as narrow ( i.e. like

one degree ) as a dedicated spot meter,so you really need to be

careful what you are aiming it at. I'm thinking of getting a Pentax

Spotmeter sometime, which I think would be much more useful

overall.

[frank_kimble]

Mel, I got my #'s from a recent Gossen catalog. Looks like both meters use the same photcell now. Maybe you have an older model before the switch to the Silicon Blue Cell(SBC). Just sent my "F" to Gossen for repair, flash reading went crazy. I was looking at maybe a digital replacement, about half the price of new "F", but their low light #'s where in the -2 to -2.5 versus -4 on the analog.

[a m]

I agree that the Luna Pro SBC is the most intuitive and easy to use meter I have ever used. Pity it is so big and chunky, almost as big as a Leica M body.

 

A clarification: The original Luna Pro with grey plastic body requires mercury batteries. The later version (post 1990?) with a black body used silver batteries. Beware, many of the older grey units are falling apart because the plastic has become brittle - some kind of material aging process.

 

Suggestion: buy a used meter on eBay. They are many listed and they are 1/2 of so of the new price. A Luna Pro SBC should be about $100.

[bob_cook]

John - I also shoot with a Rolleiflex 2.8F, always loaded with Tri

X. It has a meter built in, but I carry an old Weston Master V that

my wife gave me as a high school graduation gift before we were

married. I had it repaired and calibrated at Hollywood Light

Metrics and it is good as new. This is to the question about how

sophisticated do you need to go with a meter. All of the

responses have been great, but I think the important issue is

what film are you using? Since I use print film all the time, my

metering needs are slightly less sophisticated than if I were

using transparency film. BTW, my calibrated Weston used in

reflective mode matches my 30+ year old Rollei built in meter -

just conincidence, but interesting. I also use a Sekonic L408

with other cameras and like it very much.

[frank_bunnik]

John, in reply to your question. I do not often use the spotmeter. When my subject, a part of a landscape, is in the same sunlight as I am standing in, I use the incident meter. Even if that art is far away. However, when photographing lighted buildings against a dark sky, I use the spotmeter. Never failed me in Paris, Amritsar etc.

 

A big plus with the 408 is that you don't have to substitute parts when changing between incident and spot metering.

 

So, I do not use the spotmeter that much, but I would not want to miss it.

 

Hope this helps also, good luck, Frank

[david_henderson]

If you use transparency film in my opinion by far the best metering technique is to take multiple readings with a one degree spotmeter such as a Sekonic 508 or similar offerings from Minolta or Pentax. This is the only way that will tell you what brightness range is present in the scene and therefore that you need to use a grad or position a particular tone as a stop below a mid-tone to stop the highlights blowing out. As implied above, if you use b&w or colour print film the ability to handle greater brightness ranges means that it's easier to get away with a meter and a technique that involves a single reading, whether reflected light or incident. I'd personally avoid incident metering for landscapes. The light "over there" is often different from the light "here" and this will result in poor exposures. Further the techniques involved in strongly sidelit or backlit situations are not straightforward and indeed are debated extensively here.

[jeff_drew4]

I have several Gossen meters and use many of them as necessary. The Luna Pro is a fine meter, no matter the battery issues. I also can recommend the Scout. Mine is every bit as accurate as the higher priced models, and can handle most any normal assignment a TLR would be involved with. In fact, I have the optional clip on mine, so it fits in my Rollei's acc. shoe. The meter is relatively small compared to many of the above suggestions. Another choice is the new model Voigtlander Bessa, clip on meter. Excellent build, very small, and accurate. A little "spendy" as new, but a worthy investment over the long term. It's not a usual handheld, but can be worn around your neck very easily and can be used "handheld".

[justthings]

I recently went thru this debate also - and so much of your selection will depend on what you do. If you're shooting black and white, then you might want to consider something with Spot capability. Otherwise a meter with incident as well as reflected light capability will be great. Ultimately, I ended up with a Gossen Luna SBC - its got great low light capability, and it has several attachments available for flash metering, spot metering, and for use as an enlarging meter. I love the meter, though you need to be aware that this model is NOT petite - its very large (though not terribly heavy) and will take up room in your camera bag. I think I ended up paying about $120 for the meter and the flash attachment.

[john_tanner]

I have this desire to buy a sekonic 608. I had a Gossen Luna Pro F. This was a great meter. I can not believe the shots I got with readings of a street scene in the dark after a fresh snowfall. I sold it recently and selling it was a mistake. If you have this meter in your bag keep it! The choices that I have on my list are the Sekonic 608 and a digital Pentax Spot. One word of note about the Sekonics that fire the pocket wizards. the frequencies in the US are different so US models do matter here Gray market models of this meter have different frequencies. On the gossen older Luna Pro F there is this battery problem!

[Rob F.]

I find the Minolta Digital Autometer the most ergonomic and accurate; the Gossen Digital F the most compact and convenient.

[paul_.]

As other respondents have noted, your big decision is whether or not you need a spot meter and a flash meter. Given that, you can really spend as much or as little as you want. I used a Luna Pro and a Sekonic studio meter in school, and found the Luna Pro WAY too big. And the Luna Pro Flash meters have a lousy interface, in my opinion. I now have two meters: A Sekonic 308-B flashmeter, dead accurate, fairly wide metering range and about $300 new; and an old Gossen Pilot I bought as a backup but use regularly now with my Fuji GW670. The Pilot, once I learned to use it, meters within less than 1/2 a stop from the Sekonic (and usually agrees with it exactly), is small enough for any pocket, and cost $15 on eb*y, but won't meter flash and doesn't have quite the range into low light environments.

[louis_webb]

I use a Polaris Flashmeter,which does reflected and incident readings,is as accurate as any mega bucks meter,plus does flash if you`re that way inclined-£100(?150usd).A bargain if ever there was one.

[lex_jenkins]

Sorta depends on the film you prefer, John. If you plan to use negative film - especially b&w and print your own - I'm not sure there's any advantage to a spot meter, Zone System be damned. Remember, true Zonies shoot LF sheet film and determine exposure and processing for each individual exposure and sheet. Once you're in the position of processing more than a single frame in the same soup under the same conditions (time, temperature, etc.) it's no longer really Zoning. Unless you count the extra frames as bracketing. I dunno if that counts either.

 

So I'd go with a good incident meter for negative films. I already had an old Minolta Autometer IIIf (which is also a flashmeter) that's ugly and works just dandy. And my Rollei 2.8C came with a practically antique Bewi meter which is so cool (and still accurate) that I sometimes tote it along and use it too.

 

For critical work, especially with slow slide film, you might want a spot meter. But first you might want to have your Rollei checked and CLA'd to make sure the shutter is accurate. The slow speeds on mine are off, negligibly at 1/4-1/15, but significantly below that where 1/2 second actually measures about 1 full second and the 1 sec mark actually runs about 2 full seconds.

 

Great camera, hmm? I really prefer the lines and looks of the 2.8C to the later models that cobbled light meters onto the body, spoiling their classic looks.

[peder_mansson]

I noticed someone mentioning the Polaris. I have the Polaris Dual 5 and find it useless at night. What spotmeter will take a reading of either lit, distant buildings in an otherwise dark night. Similar case might be small sunlit part of a landscape in an otherwise very dark environment.

I also want it small and simple. It doesn´t have to do incident readings as well.