Why are there no matrix/evaluative handheld meters?

[nick_rigopoulos1]

<p>I'm a little shakey on digital handheld light meters. From what I can see, the only choices are spot (in varying degrees), incident/reflected and flash. </p>

<p>Any DSLR worth the plastic it's made out of, however, has a full blown matrix metering system that's far more advanced. Why are there no handheld meters that work like that, that have a built in 'database' of sorts of possible exposure scenarios like a DSLR?</p>

<p>This might seem like a naive question, keep in mind I'm not entirely up to speed on handheld meters in general.</p>

[richard_oleson]

<p>Personally I think it's because matrix metering is partly a gimmick to sell cameras and partly a device to improve the percentage of acceptable autoexposures for people who don't want to take the time to think about their exposures. Users of handheld meters are probably assumed to be using them to take the readings that they need and make their own judgments.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>A DSLR's meter is seeing what has been gathered and focused by the lens. The focal length changes what the metering system sees. If you want a meter with changeable lenses ... use a cheap DSLR!</p>

[luis_g]

<p>Because in theory, the little chip in cameras that handles Matrix metering is inferior to the one between your shoulders, once you understand what you're doing.</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>A camera uses reflected light to determine exposure, so exposure is affected by the lightness or darkness of items being photographed. Matrix meters use logic to "correct' for subject reflectance. Incident meters, on the other hand, directly measure the intensity of the light source. That will result in accurate exposures no matter what the reflectivity of the subject.</p>

<p>Contrast is another consideration - and sometimes the tonal range of the scene will not "fit" the capture medium. </p>

<p>So many people chime in, but they often have little of meaning to contribute!</p>

[scott_murphy_photography]

<p>Basically it boils down to the photographer doing the thinking instead of the photographer letting the camera do all the thinking for them.</p>

<p><br />Fundamentally I don't think you really understand the function of handheld meters. Incident and reflected meters don't have viewfinders, so what would be the advantage of matrix metering. They are designed to take the area that their sensors cover and come up with a Zone V (18%) gray value. Again, an average measurement for the light source. Spotmeters do have a viewfinder, however they only meter a specific area, anywhere between 1º and 5º and they too take that reading and normalize it to 18% gray. They are designed to be used as tools, they are not supposed to do <em>everything for you</em> like cameras (quite sadly) are doing now. The photographer that is holding them has to take the readings and, understanding that the readings mean, arrive at the correct exposure.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>The best meter for evaluative handheld meter readings is the 1 degree spot meter! The evaluation is placed where it should be, totally in your hands. Knowing that the meter reads the 18% gray and that most of the time you want to get your darkest textural area about 2 stops lower than this and your highest about 2 stops higher, you take readings and adjust the exposure to fit what you want to record--evaluation and maybe even matrix. It takes a little time to get the hang of it, but you will find it the best metering system you can employ--albeit slower than one that just spits it out-but more likely to be accurate in all cases.</p>

[nick_rigopoulos1]

<p>Matt:</p>

<p>I didn't think of that, that metering is dependent on focal length. It seems so obvious to me now why it wouldn't work!</p>

<p>Thanks guys.</p>

[nick_rigopoulos1]

<p>I've read the general definitions, but can someone explain to me in clear terms the difference between a spot meter and an incident meter? The former measures reflected light in a very specific area, and you can measure that without having to actually place the meter there...and the incident meter is actually required to be at the spot you wish to meter?</p>

<p>This might sound odd, but let's say the subject you wish to meter (with an incident meter) is in an unaccessible location...? How would you go about working around that?</p>

[dave_s]

<p><em>This might sound odd, but let's say the subject you wish to meter (with an incident meter) is in an unaccessible location...?</em></p>

<p>You can usually find an accessible location which is exposed to similar light, and use that as a proxy.</p>

[ilkka]

<p>Incident light meter is not good for three types of subjects: 1-backlit subjects, shooting against the sun, sunsets 2-subjects that emit their own light, for example neon lights at night and, 3-subjects that are in different light from where you stand and in places that it is not possible to get to a similarly lit place, for example shooting out from a window in a building or maybe from the shadowed edge of a canyon. In these cases it is better to remove the cone from the meter and use it as a reflected light meter. </p>

<p>The biggest problem with matrix metering is that the small computer inside takes the measurements and then decides what reading to use. It is very hard to know, even with some experience, how to compensate that reading in light, dark or backlit situations. I find it easier to use center weighted metering in SLRs because the logic they follow is easier to understand and thus easier to compensate when the meter is most likely going to be wrong. Digital of course brings a solution in the form of histogram, which instantly gives good feedback on exposure, though even that is not perfect.</p>

[gdw]

<p >There are two types of handheld light meters; those that measure light reflected from your subject called reflected light meters and those that measure the light falling on your subject called incident light meters.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Both types of meters only know one thing—middle gray. They do not know white. They do not know black. They only know middle gray. If you do not understand this you will never be able to use a light meter correctly regardless of whether it is built in or hand held.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The type of meter that you have in your camera is a reflected light meter. It measures the light reflected from your subject. The spot meter is a reflected light meter that reads only a very narrow area. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >The major difference between the reflected and the incident meters in use is that you point the reflected light meter toward your subject and it is very important where in your you choose to make the reading. It is very important to know how to use a reflected light meter because if you do not read something that is middle gray or has the same reflectance as middle gray then the meter reading is going to be incorrect unless you make a manual adjustment to the reading on the meter. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >If you meter something that is very dark—anything darker than middle gray to black then with the reflected light meter you have to make a compensation from one to two stops UNDER what the light meter is reading. If you point a reflected meter at black it is going to think that you are smart enough to be pointing it at something that is middle gray and is therefore going to give you the correct exposure to make the black into middle gray by giving you a meter reading that over OVERexpose.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Conversley, if you meter something that is white, the meter is going to make the white into middle gray by UNDERexposeing. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >As you can see, the area that you read is not only important—unless you use the meter intelligently it is going to give you a wrong reading. This accounts for much of the problem new photographer have with using the built-in meters in cameras. It is very rare that a light meter makes a mistake—although you are constantly hearing that they do—it’s not the meter, the mistake is made by the person using the meter who fails to understand how a light meter works.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >You point an incident meter in just the opposite direction—from the position of the subject you point the little haystack shaped dome of the incident meter toward the camera (or in some instances, toward the light but usually toward the camera.) Therefore an incident meter is not affected by the color or tone of your subject. It is simply telling you that with the amount of light that is falling on the dome will produce middle gray at the reading on the meter. In most situations you will not have to make any adjustments to the reading from the incident meter—and definitely no adjustments because of the color or tone of the subject. You will usually take an incident reading from the position of the subject, however, it is not always necessary. What is necessary is that the dome point in the direction of the camera from the subject and that absolutely the exact light is falling on the dome as is falling on your subject.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The spot meter is simply a variation of the reflected light meter and all the same rules of using a reflected light meter apply to the spot meter. What is unique about the spot meter is that as I said it reads a very narrow angle making it easier to place the reading on an specific area in the photograph that is middle gray or near middle gray whereas the general reflected meter reads a very wide area in hopes of balancing out all the tones—hopefully—to middle gray.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I will say this about light meters—they do not make mistakes—but the reading you will get from any of them may not be the exposure that is optimum unless they are used with forethought and intelligence. Just because you take the meter out of the camera and hold it in your hand does not mean that it creates some miracle of correctness, there is no magic elixir. I would also say this about hand held light meters: if you are not capable of making well exposed photographs using the meter built into your camera you are not likely to be capable of using a hand held meter to make correct exposures. What you get from a hand held meter is convenience not magic. An awful lot of money is wasted each year by photographer’s looking for a miracle. When it is discovered that the hand held meter does not give any better results than the built in meter the meter goes in the bag to rarely come out. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >My advice to anyone that does not know the difference between incident and spot or anyone that thinks there is a reason for a hand held meter to use a matrix reading would be that you are not quite ready for a hand held meter. </p>

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>Nick,</p>

<p>LCD playback screens are getting larger and more accurate.<br /> High capacity memory is getting cheaper & cheaper.</p>

<p>Gary is correct mostly for film usage.</p>

<p>But <strong>you're the DSLR generation</strong>, simply look at the Playback/Preview screen to see all the properties of the image instantly. You also have the luxury of just <strong>firing away</strong> at 6 FPS+ while bracketing, with deleting on the fly or in Post processing...<strong> </strong><br /> <strong>"You don't need no stinking Matrix handheld meter !"</strong></p>

<p> </p>

[gary_watson]

<p><em>Incident light meter is not good for three types of subjects: 1-backlit subjects, shooting against the sun</em></p>

<p>Make that 2, Ilkka.Why would a reflected light meter work better than an incident meter here?</p>

[nick_rigopoulos1]

<p>Gus:</p>

<p>You're right I am the DSLR generation, I'm only 23. I'm trying to get more into film though-- I just bought a second hand mamiya 7II as a jumping off point, so I figured I'd start my learnin' =)</p>

[alvinyap]

<p>I'm pretty sure the matrix meter in my cameras reacts to which AF point is selected.....</p>

<p>Alvin</p>

[stp]

<p>Nick, while Gary gave you some good explanations, I strongly disagree with his last statement implying that you are not ready for a hand held meter. The best way to learn is by doing. Even though the Mamiya 7II has a built-in meter, it's still a good camera to supplement with a hand-held meter (I do it all the time with mine, and I often use a gray card for spot metering). Good luck and have fun with it.</p>

[sfcole]

<p>Matrix meters, at least in Nikons, evaluate exactly what the lens is seeing, and compares it with software library of zillions of images that may be similar. A handheld meter wouldn't know exactly what your framing is unless you used a lens that exactly matched what the camera saw.</p>

[ilkka]

<p>Gary, I was maybe not clear enough in my writing, or thinking. What I meant to say is that if you shoot something like a sunset, with for example a person silhoutted against it, incident light meter would expose the person ''correctly'' but spoil the sunset. Reflective meter can be used to get a good reading of the coloured sky and with suitable compensation a ''correct'' exposure can the be made. This is much more difficult with incident. But one could of course classify the sunset under subjects that emit light. So one would be right to say that just two subject types are not suitable for incident.</p>

[nick_rigopoulos1]

<p>Thanks for all the info guys.</p>

<p>I was actually aware (somewhat, anyway) that a meter gives you the exposure information you need to render what you're metering 18% gray. I know the basics of how a built in meter works, etc.</p>

<p>What I am not sure about, however, is how to use a meter (any type really) with any degree of consistency in high contrast situations, like sunsets. As some aptly pointed out, I am the cursed "DSLR generation", and being just a whippersnapper I have relied on one thing more than any other for correct exposure: the LCD image review. I use it for basic confirmation of correct exposure, I use it for correct nd grad placement, correct nd grad strength, etc.</p>

<p>I have been spoiled, in other words. I'm now on a mission to correct that and relearn how to do it the proper way. There's an element of necessity to this as well since the Mamiya 7's built-in meter is basically a spot meter, and certainly isn't a fancy matrix meter. </p>

<p>I am primarily doing landscape photography at the moment, it is what interests me the most. What type of meter would be most appropriate? A 1* spot? I've been reading up on the Zone system (the exposure side of it anyway, not the darkroom side), is knowledge and correct usage of the zone system essential for making the most out of a spot meter? </p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Nick</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Nick, see if you can find a Pentax Spot meter that was converted to the Zone system.</p>

<p>Hard to find, but there's one for sale by a reputable seller here:</p>

<p><a href="http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13658"></a>http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13658</p>

<p>-Marc</p>

[gdw]

<p >Nick, I’m not familiar with the Mamiya but if it does have a built in meter and that is a spot meter why are you torturing yourself? Just point it at something that has the same reflectance as middle gray. And for gsake don’t get all wrapped up in the percentage numbers that’s another useless teckie argument. Nothing about photography is that critical. And don’t get hung up on evaluative because it’s a fancy name to sell cameras (I sold cameras longer than you have been around.) It’s like Proctor and Gamble with Improved. You have to stick a New and Improved label on it each year—built in obsolesces even thought it’s not obsolete. A meter is a meter is a meter and it is only going to tell you middle gray and only work correctly regardless of the fancy words if you use it with intelligence.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >If you know how a meter works then you understand that you cannot point the meter at anything other than middle gray and not have to make an adjustment to the reading the meter is giving you. If there is no middle gray in the image area you can (1) average it out by splitting the reading area between half white and half black or half highlights and half shadows (that’s the evaluative part) or (2) find a substitute that has the same reflectance: faded denim, the back of your hand if you are a normally complexioned Caucasian, brown paper grocery bag, a person’s face (if you are actually seeing flesh and not Merle Norman or Cover Girl), green grass works great; just be sure the substitute is in the same light as your subject or (3) read off of white or black and make a one to two stop manual adjustment, just go the right way, close down for black and open up for white.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >And forget the dumb ars Zone System. The shooting side is good theory for understanding tones in a photograph but without the darkroom side there is no Zone System. The two sides are inseparable. It works great with sheet film but is way too complicated to waste time with for anyone using roll film. Good lands, why make photography so darn complicated. You can spend your life wasting away on the teckie junk or you can take photographs. A ridiculous waste of time. Adams was a great postcard photographer but he has single handedly done more to screw up photography than any other single individual in history of the sport. If you are shooting BW just use a split developer, no math and it will work just as well with a tenth the investment of time.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Of course, you may just want a new toy. If that’s the case, have at it. Photographic equipment manufacturers have lived off that one for years. I have been around long enough to know how much money is wasted each year on that dream piece of equipment that frequently ends up sitting on the shelf or in the camera bag. Photographers buy equipment the way women buy shoes, more to admire and possess it than to use it.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >BTW: I was once twenty three and made all those mistakes, screwed around with all the theories and tomfoolery and wasted all that time. If I could start over again I would kick Adams from here to kingdom come and just enjoy photography. Just thought I might explain why I am so opinionated.</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

[dave_s]

<p><em>Both types of meters only know one thing—middle gray.</em><br>

<em></em><br>

I think I know what you are trying to say, but this sentence is misleading. Have you actually used a handheld meter? I dial the needle on my Luna-Pro to wherever I want-- usually two stops below middle gray, because I'm metering a shadow. This is pretty standard practice.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

<p>Zero the dial, or read the display, and the result will be 'middle grey'.</p>

<p>Do something with what the meter says (like dialing in the needle to wherever you want), and that, and only that, will move the result away from 'middle grey'.</p>

<p>So it was not that misleading, i think. Not at all, in fact. ;-)</p>

[gdw]

<p>Dave my first meter was a Weston III purchased at Sears and Roebuck over a half century ago. From that I went to a Norwood Director to a Brockway then the Sekonic 168 (I believe that was the model number) and the Weston Master V, both of which I still have. I own two Pentax 1 degree spot metera and am currently useing a Sekonic, 358 or 558 (model numbers are not a big thing with me), it's the one without the spot meter, along with a large number of cameras that have built in meters. The first was I believe the original Pentax Spotmatic in the early to mid sixties. I sold light meters for just under thirty years during which time I had an opportunity to hold a couple including the Luna Pro you mention.<br>

The statement is in no way misleading to anyone that understands how light meters work. Just because you make the adjustment prior to taking the reading rather than after in no way changes the fact that the meter does not know anything other than middle gray. That is a good technique if you want to be constantly changing the setting on your meter and taking the chance of still having it set to shadow when you take your next reading. I always found it preferable to leave the meter set correctly for the ISO and do the correction mentaly as the situation required.</p>