Contax G2 lightmeter doesnt match with Mamiya RZ67, why?

[tony_black1]

<p>Hi,<br /> I have a <strong>mamiya rz67</strong> and a <strong>contax g2</strong> . I was checking out their lightmeter and somehow their values dont match. what could it be?<br /> they are both in f 2.8, iso 100 and equivalent lenses.(mamiya rz67 has 110mm lens on it and the contax g2 has 45mm on)<br /> and pointing them out to the same scene from same distance.<br /> contax is giving a value of <strong>1/2 sec at f2.8</strong> and the mamiya is giving <strong>1/4 sec at f2.8</strong> .<br /> what could be the problem? they both expose well.<br /> ??</p>

[john tonai]

<p>This is interesting. Someone else named Tony Black has just posted a similar question in this forum. Only his Mamiya RZ 67 doesn't match his Contax G2 intead of the other way around.</p>

[randall_pukalo]

<p>Dont worry about it, this is common. I noticed a similar discrepancy between my Minolta 7 and 7D, yet they both exposed well. "build variation" if you will between cameras.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>What type of metering do the two cameras use? Probably not the same. Also, each camera manufacturer might calibrate their meters slightly differently. I get the same thing with two different cameras - there's always as slight variation, so don't worry about it.</p>

[jim_momary]

<p>see my other post.</p>

[jeff_drew4]

<p>Easy! trust your G2! It is the most high-tech and modern of the 2 designs. :-)<br>

Seriously, what you are reporting is about a 1-stop difference and that is common when comparing dissimilar meters, given my experience. The 2 sensors are designed & built differently, lens designs (that the light is passing thru) are different and the logic of each system treats the information comparatively different. My G2 is spot-on accurate when I shoot Kodachrome or Astia. So when I use my Luna-Pro or Pentax meters I sometimes do a spot-check with the G2. Heck, I have 3 different Luna-Pros from different vintages and they will return readings within 1-stop of each other depending on the luminance of the subject or scene. Then there is the lens-shade issue; are you using one on both tests? If this is going to drive you crazy, load them up with slide film, use a tripod, meter a well lit subject with a Macbeth color checker in it, and then process & review the results. Pick the sample you like best and consider that meter as best and the other as second. Then, keep shooting! :-)</p>

[craig_supplee]

<p>It's only Thursday night. Why am I seeing double on this forum?</p>

[tony_black1]

<p>:) so guys what camera do you recommend to use as a lightmeter for my 4x5 camera? carrying the heavy weight is not a problem.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>Neither - get a handheld spot meter, like the Pentax meter.</p>

[jeff_drew4]

<p>Tony,<br>

Lightmeters measure light or lack therof, so if you are serious about medium & large formats, then get the best meter you can afford! Use it and learn its pluses'n'minuses. On occasion I have purchased high-end, professional meters that are barely used for less than 1/2 of their new price. You have already invested in "professional level" cameras, so a handheld meter would be useful and add some convenience.<br>

Given all that, experience will benefit you even more! All the meter does is measure. You take & make the image! "It is an Art!"</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>Compareing lightmeter readings is the quickest way a photographer can drive himself crazy, in the case you quote the parameters are different, assuming that you are using in camera metering in both casas, the acceptance angle of the lenses are different, as are the metering cells.<br>

There's an old saying " a man with one watch always knows what time it is, a man with two watches is never sure "</p>