Anyone using a hand-held meter w/ their 10D/EOS?

[patricks]

I'm thinking of adding a Sekonic 358, which will be on sale in a few

days via a Mamiya special at a local store, with the purpose do get

more exact exposure with ambient reading for portraits etc. Would

also work as a flash meter.

 

Anyone using hand-helding meters, perhaps the Sekonic 358 per se,

with their DSLRs? Does it improve exposure?

[chip]

Patrick,

 

A handheld incident meter will give you different EV than your TTL meter because it sees light falling on the subject not bouncing off of it. This is why they are more reliable and repeatable. Once you find the normal density that you like you can usually dial in a correction to the meter and it will be dead on day in and day out where your TTL meter will vary from moment to moment.

 

I use a Minolta Autometer IVF for both studio flash and shooting outdoors. I take a reading only as the light changes or as I change position on the racetrack or field. I use it exactly the same way as I used to use it with my film bodies (I went digtial early this year), and it delivers the same perfect results.

 

As to using the meter in reflected mode your TTL meter is more reliable.

 

HTH

[rich815]

It improves exposure only as much as it improves or allows better technique. Besides the high-end DLSR's have spot-meters. How and if one uses one if the main issue.

[gerry_szarek]

I have tried both methods, the partial meter circle vs a hand help spot meter. Both work fine, the hardest thing is to make sure you don't overexpose the image, because unlike film, the CMOS chip is unforgiving.

 

For the film camera if you are using negative film it just doesn't matter for normal scenes.

 

Gerry

[patricks]

Gerry,

 

you hit on an important point with the 10D - it is amazingly easy to overexpose [parts of the] photos. The latidude just isn't there.

 

Richard - I swung by your gallery - you have some truly amazing photos there, some of the best looking Contax G2 shots I've seen - great stuff especially given the limitations of that camera body (nothing wrong w/ the glass)

 

So then the $60K questions is if it is worth springing for a Sekonic 558 which has the spot meter (with built in readings in the viewfinder)? The 358 is just shy of $200, and I mainly shoot people/portraits.

[digitmstr]

the 10D has about the same latitude as a slide IF you shoot JPG. If you use RAW and a conversion program such as C1 DSRL you will actually gain latitude.

[patricks]

Here comes the real ignorant question - if I spot meter a face e.g 10 meter, will that metering be of Zone 5/18% gray and then I have to compensate in my on camera exposure settings or would that metering be the exact correct exposure?

[brett_bainbridge]

Spot-metering the face will tell you how to put the face into zone 5. If you want it in Zone 6 instead (likely) then you have to mentally compensate. Just like any reflected meter, the spot meter gives you a formula to expose 'properly' under the assumption it's pointed at a Zone 5 object. Whenever it's pointed at something lighter or darker, you need to compensate on your own.

[walter_strong3]

That's always ben the problem with spot meters as I see it. How in the name of heaven do you know you are putting the spot on a "Zone 5". I guess that you could always take a reading off an 18% relectance card but that gives you the exact same exposure as an incident reading. Why waste time taking spot readings when the incident reading is much quicker and easier?

[steve_barnett2]

As a life long addict of using hand held meters with any camera, no matter how sophisticated the built in exposure system, I must admit that since getting a Canon 10d I haven't used mine once. I use the RAW format, and the only important exposure issue is not to get your highlights blown out. And for this the histogram function with the black flashing warning areas is all you need. Getting your highlights as far as possible to the right of the histogram, and no further, is all it takes. This can be done in seconds via the review button and an exposure correction made. All other considerations, like colour temp for skin tones, can be sorted out in post processing.

[beauh44]

I tested my 10D's meter against a spot meter and it consistently came within 1/3 of a stop,(plus or minus) agreeing with the camera's meter. If you shoot in RAW, this won't be a problem at all, and even if you don't, it seems that the 10D's meter is pretty darned accurate. Well, mine is, anyway. ;-) So, I use the camera's built-in meter and now only use my spot meter for my view camera. Best wishes . . .

[patricks]

well, the purpose of a spot meter is to measure a specific point further away when it is not possible/practical to walk there and get an incident reading. as good as the eval. metering system is in the Canon cameras, it can easily be fooled in adverse lightning conditions, thus having a hand-held meter for critical shots and then bracket would ensure the outcome.

 

I do shot RAW and with the histogram/info review.

[patricks]

Walter, to try to answer your question. The spot meter puts whatever you point you direct it to on Zone 5/18% gray. Then it is up to you to measure/evaluate the different values/zones within the scene and place them to your liking.

[steve_barnett2]

"it can easily be fooled in adverse lightning conditions, thus having a hand-held meter for critical shots and then bracket would ensure the outcome."

 

But surely it is still quicker to rattle a shot off using the Canon metering and look at the histogram? If you use the histogram function anyway the ONLY critcal exposure calculation you make is still where your highlights actually are, and keeping them within bounds. The histogram has to be more accurate than taking spot readings to keep your highlights within the limited range of the sensor. I suppose you could take a shadow and a highlight reading and work out your zone five in the traditional way, but why bother when your exposure results from the crappy Canon meter are in front of your eyes within seconds and represent the real truth of over or under exposure.

[victor_yushenko]

I agree with Steve. I though about getting an external light meter (or maybe using my EOS3) for my digital rebel, but I realized that histogram is superior. Looking at histogram is faster then spot metering (IMHO). It also seems to me that exposure is not super critical while shooting in RAW. 16 bit raw provides enough margins around 8 bit image sent to output device (display or printer).

[digitmstr]

Generally speaking, a meter is must have (IMO) for any photographer. It is an invaluable tool for learning as well. I use a SEKONIC L-308B

and it confirms my 10D reading which tells me that the 10D meter is working just fine.

[steve_barnett2]

'I use a SEKONIC L-308B and it confirms my 10D reading which tells me that the 10D meter is working just fine'

 

Am I missing something Giampierio? If your hand held meter says your 10d meter is working fine, why bother? I agree it is a great learning tool, and if you have any sort of film camera and do your own processing it is an absolute 'must have' piece of kit. But using one simply to duplicate information is absurd in the extreme. Learn to trust your knowledge of photography (allied in this case with the histogram function), but please don't encourage people to confuse 'more' information with 'better' information!

[chip]

Hi All,

 

Patrick is asking about an incident meter with flash capability not a spot meter. He wants to shots people portraits with his DSLR. What are you talking about spot meters for?

 

I'm all for using spotmeters where you can't get under the same light as the subject but portrait subjects are invaribly close by and under the same light as the shooter unless shooting with studio lights (TTL is usless here unless you are using hot lights and who does that any more except on a move set), or the subject is in a cave and you are in the sun. For portrati shooting a handheld meter is a very reliable way to get good exposure value.

 

A digital body with the historgram turned on is also very good for most shooting situations but doesn't tell the whole story. Nor can the histogram it tell you where you are if you are purposely deviating from a standard exposure value or when the lighting and subject contrast is higher or lower than normal.

 

This is why handheld meters are still used, they work BEST if you want to have total control of the exposure. Still true for film and bits.

 

HTH

[patricks]

In my case, I would use it for film based photography as well, but since I know how it performs in those circumstances, I didn't include that in the orginal question.

 

Steve is largely right that histogram, RAW format and digital pre-view to a large extent nullifies the need for a hand-held meter.

 

But then again, say that you are going to shoot an animal standing in snow. How would you ensure that the white is not blown out and that the fur of the animal has the right color w/o a spot meter (not my normal subject but...)

 

Cheers,

[andreas_carl]

The histogram is definitely the way to go. I had a Sony F717 before, and it offers real time histogram on the preview screen. Withih a week use I was able to correctly expose every picture using manual exposure mode and judging the histogram. This is one feature I miss the most on my new 10D...

[steve_barnett2]

'But then again, say that you are going to shoot an animal standing in snow. How would you ensure that the white is not blown out and that the fur of the animal has the right color w/o a spot meter (not my normal subject but...)'

 

You have no choice other than work with the number of stops latitude that the DSLR gives you. About five or six. So the spot meter will give you a good exposure for the fur (assuming we aren't talking about a white rabbit), in which case the snow may be blown out, but a spot meter can't stop that, it will only show you where the highlights are in terms of lux, and that may be well outside the range of the camera. What a DSLR can do however is manage the shadows better than slide film, for which the above latitudes equally apply. So, using the histogram, you make an exposure that is just on the edge of showing the black flashing warning ares that indicate blown highlights for the snow. Your animal may now appear underexposed in the awful little screen, but shadow recovery is far greater than you may imagine in post processing. Naturally in such extreme circumstances you would fire off a few bracketed shots either side to be sure, including one just for the fur. But whether using a hand held meter, or camera meter, you will have to make a compromised exposed and work in the sweet spot of the camera sensor or film.

[chip]

Hi Steve B.

 

You have an EOS 10D with 6 stops of dynamic range? I have an EOS 1D and at best can only find about 5 stops without a lot of messing about with the RAW 16 bit image.