Looking for a flashmeter, questions

I am looking to buy a good lightmeter/flashmeter.
I have done my research on the web and it look like Sekonic offer
different interesting models. A bit expensive for me so I look first for
features/price...

What I need : ambient light mesure incident and reflexive (all offer that).
Flashmeter mesurement that can be triggered by the light of flash, even
in fill-in situation (some of my old flashes are high-voltage, so use of
sync-cord is not an option, unless the cord is on camera and that can be
unpractical).
Cumulative flashmeter is a nice feature. I can live without it.

What I really would like is the % ambiant-flash with help for
calculation, to change easily the ratio on the fly.
The possibility to add 1% spotmeter would be a very nice thing : 5%
spotmeter is not that better than the spotmeter on the digital
camera...And I would like to be able to use this with large format camera.

I dont need cine mode, I dont need included trigger for pocket wizard
that would not be compatible with my own triggers system.

So my question is : what is the first model that offer calculation for
fill-in ratio ? How easy is it to use on the fly ?

On studio when flashes are the only light I can go on with my "carboard
flasmeter" .
(Try with a grey 18% card on the subject, look at the histogram, adjust,
retry : it is not very precise, but cheap and easy)

Thank you for your experience with the various models, pro-and-cons, etc...

Noëlle Adam

On 2013.12.20, 06:07 , YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle wrote:
I am looking to buy a good lightmeter/flashmeter.
I have done my research on the web and it look like Sekonic offer
different interesting models. A bit expensive for me so I look first for
features/price...

What I need : ambient light mesure incident and reflexive (all offer that).
Flashmeter mesurement that can be triggered by the light of flash, even
in fill-in situation (some of my old flashes are high-voltage, so use of
sync-cord is not an option, unless the cord is on camera and that can be
unpractical).
Cumulative flashmeter is a nice feature. I can live without it.

What I really would like is the % ambiant-flash with help for
calculation, to change easily the ratio on the fly.
The possibility to add 1% spotmeter would be a very nice thing : 5%
spotmeter is not that better than the spotmeter on the digital
camera...And I would like to be able to use this with large format camera.

I dont need cine mode, I dont need included trigger for pocket wizard
that would not be compatible with my own triggers system.

So my question is : what is the first model that offer calculation for
fill-in ratio ? How easy is it to use on the fly ?

Most do - esp. studio (flash) meters. It's easy to use - but I simply
calculate in my head where I want the fill light(s) v. the key for a
given ratio and then meter those lights after setting the key. A final
check with all the lights (at lower ratios like 1:2) may result in all
the lights being dropped half a stop or more. At high ratios it's not
all that important - and in both cases, unless I want a really fat
aperture, I just go with the total reading and stop down if needed (the
ratio will remain correct).

In the studio ambient rarely makes it onto film unless there are
powerful fill floods or huge windows (I shoot studio at 1/200 or 1/500).
That said, the mode is useful outdoors when using flash with "slow"
shutter speeds like 1/60 or so.

On studio when flashes are the only light I can go on with my "carboard
flasmeter" .
(Try with a grey 18% card on the subject, look at the histogram, adjust,
retry : it is not very precise, but cheap and easy)

It's actually quite precise as well as cheap and easy. The only caveat
being it's useless for rim/hair light settings. But it's fine for the
'total' exposure.


Thank you for your experience with the various models, pro-and-cons, etc...

I seem to recall a Minolta incident meter with an attachment probe to
use with LF cameras ... but it's been a while and of course they are no
longer in production - search ebay/clist, etc.

I've had a couple Minoltas and a couple Sekonics. With digital cameras
you'll still need to bias the meter v. "good" exposures on the camera.
This is for various reasons including how the camera reports exposure,
whether the camera gets its histo from JPG (most) or from the raw (few
if any) and in any case the weightings and algorithms they use.

(Short version: exposure meters don't match digital camera meters/histos
except by chance. They usually match film camera spot meters within a
half stop).

Sekonic and Minolta use slightly different values for neutral grey.

Using the spot meter on the Sekonic (558 and 508) is fine for highlight
exposure points for slide film (meter HL to 2 or 2.3 stops over aperture).

I don't use meters much anymore other than the initial lighting setup or
rare occasions when I free the Hasselblad from its case.

--
"The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and
co-operation;
it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another."
-George Orwell, 1945

Le 20/12/13 22:27, Alan Browne a écrit :

So my question is : what is the first model that offer calculation for
fill-in ratio ? How easy is it to use on the fly ?

Most do - esp. studio (flash) meters. It's easy to use - but I simply
calculate in my head where I want the fill light(s) v. the key for a
given ratio and then meter those lights after setting the key. A final
check with all the lights (at lower ratios like 1:2) may result in all
the lights being dropped half a stop or more. At high ratios it's not
all that important - and in both cases, unless I want a really fat
aperture, I just go with the total reading and stop down if needed (the
ratio will remain correct).

In the studio ambient rarely makes it onto film unless there are
powerful fill floods or huge windows (I shoot studio at 1/200 or 1/500).
That said, the mode is useful outdoors when using flash with "slow"
shutter speeds like 1/60 or so.

I would like to use it for when the flash is complimentary to the
ambiant, or the other way ; outdoors or indoors but in real-life
situation, not studio with complex setting. The too clever nikon i-ttl
just drove me nuts trying to guess what was going to happen...And I
ended with manual settings and feeling very stupid.
The i-ttl is "perfect" but the choices it makes are not guessable, and
are not what I would have made.

Using mesures in the studio -I am still learning and experimenting, I am
always- is an hope to create better settings faster.

On studio when flashes are the only light I can go on with my "carboard
flasmeter" .
(Try with a grey 18% card on the subject, look at the histogram, adjust,
retry : it is not very precise, but cheap and easy)

It's actually quite precise as well as cheap and easy. The only caveat
being it's useless for rim/hair light settings. But it's fine for the
'total' exposure.
You are right, I had to work hard to get correct hair lights !
My experiment model is a big doll head, blond hair almost white and this
plastic hair does not catch light like humain hair.
Not at all like afro dreads .

Thank you for your experience with the various models, pro-and-cons,
etc...

I seem to recall a Minolta incident meter with an attachment probe to
use with LF cameras ... but it's been a while and of course they are no
longer in production - search ebay/clist, etc.

I just borrowed a Minolta V from a friend. The light meter works but it
seems broken, it does not change mode so I was not able to try
flashmeter mode. It has no attachement for spot.

I've had a couple Minoltas and a couple Sekonics. With digital cameras
you'll still need to bias the meter v. "good" exposures on the camera.
They come uncalibrated ?
This is for various reasons including how the camera reports exposure,
whether the camera gets its histo from JPG (most) or from the raw (few
if any) and in any case the weightings and algorithms they use.

(Short version: exposure meters don't match digital camera meters/histos
except by chance. They usually match film camera spot meters within a
half stop).
It never came to me the idea to compare. I'll do that.

Sekonic and Minolta use slightly different values for neutral grey.
You mean, another shade of grey of provided card ? Or using the s ame
card, you get different values ?

Using the spot meter on the Sekonic (558 and 508) is fine for highlight
exposure points for slide film (meter HL to 2 or 2.3 stops over aperture).

I don't use meters much anymore other than the initial lighting setup or
rare occasions when I free the Hasselblad from its case.

I was thinking to try the digital camera spot as a spotmeter for the GF
(being a GF newbie, obviously).
But if a true spotmeter is really needed, then I'd like to buy something
that can do flashmeter + spotmeter.
My ambition is to be able to use GF for architecture, with slides or
more tolerant color negative. I am not really into black and white, I am
a color person.
Thank you very much for your input.

Noëlle Adam

On 2013.12.21, 03:55 , YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle wrote:
Le 20/12/13 22:27, Alan Browne a écrit :

So my question is : what is the first model that offer calculation for
fill-in ratio ? How easy is it to use on the fly ?

Most do - esp. studio (flash) meters. It's easy to use - but I simply
calculate in my head where I want the fill light(s) v. the key for a
given ratio and then meter those lights after setting the key. A final
check with all the lights (at lower ratios like 1:2) may result in all
the lights being dropped half a stop or more. At high ratios it's not
all that important - and in both cases, unless I want a really fat
aperture, I just go with the total reading and stop down if needed (the
ratio will remain correct).

In the studio ambient rarely makes it onto film unless there are
powerful fill floods or huge windows (I shoot studio at 1/200 or 1/500).
That said, the mode is useful outdoors when using flash with "slow"
shutter speeds like 1/60 or so.

I would like to use it for when the flash is complimentary to the
ambiant, or the other way ; outdoors or indoors but in real-life
situation, not studio with complex setting. The too clever nikon i-ttl
just drove me nuts trying to guess what was going to happen...And I
ended with manual settings and feeling very stupid.
The i-ttl is "perfect" but the choices it makes are not guessable, and
are not what I would have made.

The mixed lighting modes work fine - but don't expect them to match your
digital camera sensitivity - (see below).



Using mesures in the studio -I am still learning and experimenting, I am
always- is an hope to create better settings faster.

On studio when flashes are the only light I can go on with my "carboard
flasmeter" .
(Try with a grey 18% card on the subject, look at the histogram, adjust,
retry : it is not very precise, but cheap and easy)

It's actually quite precise as well as cheap and easy. The only caveat
being it's useless for rim/hair light settings. But it's fine for the
'total' exposure.
You are right, I had to work hard to get correct hair lights !
My experiment model is a big doll head, blond hair almost white and this
plastic hair does not catch light like humain hair.
Not at all like afro dreads .

Thank you for your experience with the various models, pro-and-cons,
etc...

I seem to recall a Minolta incident meter with an attachment probe to
use with LF cameras ... but it's been a while and of course they are no
longer in production - search ebay/clist, etc.

I just borrowed a Minolta V from a friend. The light meter works but it
seems broken, it does not change mode so I was not able to try
flashmeter mode. It has no attachement for spot.

I used to have the Min V. Excellent meter.


I've had a couple Minoltas and a couple Sekonics. With digital cameras
you'll still need to bias the meter v. "good" exposures on the camera.
They come uncalibrated ?

They come calibrated to Sekonic or Minolta's standards. If that matched
your digital camera within 1/2 stop I'd be very surprised.

The bias is something you carry in your head. Though on the Sekonic
(and IIRC the Min V) you can enter your own bias. I prefer to leave it
at zero. Salt your own food to taste.


This is for various reasons including how the camera reports exposure,
whether the camera gets its histo from JPG (most) or from the raw (few
if any) and in any case the weightings and algorithms they use.

(Short version: exposure meters don't match digital camera meters/histos
except by chance. They usually match film camera spot meters within a
half stop).
It never came to me the idea to compare. I'll do that.

Sekonic and Minolta use slightly different values for neutral grey.
You mean, another shade of grey of provided card ? Or using the s
ame card, you get different values ?

They just have different neutral grey points. It's not a great deal,
but it is there.


Using the spot meter on the Sekonic (558 and 508) is fine for highlight
exposure points for slide film (meter HL to 2 or 2.3 stops over
aperture).

I don't use meters much anymore other than the initial lighting setup or
rare occasions when I free the Hasselblad from its case.

I was thinking to try the digital camera spot as a spotmeter for the GF
(being a GF newbie, obviously).
But if a true spotmeter is really needed, then I'd like to buy something
that can do flashmeter + spotmeter.

In new equipment, I'd go for Sekonic. (I confess that I haven't been
following recent models at all). Pentax used to make a great spot meter
(not useful for flash, however). Gossen is highly rated as well - I
know several pros who use them but I haven't.

My ambition is to be able to use GF for architecture, with slides or
more tolerant color negative. I am not really into black and white, I am
a color person.
Thank you very much for your input.

De rien.

--
"The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and
co-operation;
it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another."
-George Orwell, 1945

Le 21/12/13 17:34, Alan Browne a écrit :

I used to have the Min V. Excellent meter.

The minolta V is not mine, so I do no consider opening it an put some
contact cleaner. But I have read the documentation.


I've had a couple Minoltas and a couple Sekonics. With digital cameras
you'll still need to bias the meter v. "good" exposures on the camera.
They come uncalibrated ?

They come calibrated to Sekonic or Minolta's standards. If that matched
your digital camera within 1/2 stop I'd be very surprised.

The bias is something you carry in your head. Though on the Sekonic
(and IIRC the Min V) you can enter your own bias. I prefer to leave it
at zero. Salt your own food to taste.

Hum, I may have taste in exposure (years of slides...) but I have no
taste in mesurement. I understand what you mean, anyway.

Noëlle Adam

On 12/21/2013 12:49 PM, YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle wrote:
Le 21/12/13 17:34, Alan Browne a écrit :

I used to have the Min V. Excellent meter.

The minolta V is not mine, so I do no consider opening it an put some
contact cleaner. But I have read the documentation.

I have used a pencil eraser to clean contacts, without an damage. The
excess rubber is easily disposed of. just use very light pressure.



I've had a couple Minoltas and a couple Sekonics. With digital cameras
you'll still need to bias the meter v. "good" exposures on the camera.
They come uncalibrated ?

They come calibrated to Sekonic or Minolta's standards. If that matched
your digital camera within 1/2 stop I'd be very surprised.

The bias is something you carry in your head. Though on the Sekonic
(and IIRC the Min V) you can enter your own bias. I prefer to leave it
at zero. Salt your own food to taste.

Hum, I may have taste in exposure (years of slides...) but I have no
taste in mesurement. I understand what you mean, anyway.

Noëlle Adam



--
PeterN