This is a question aimed at the photographers who use both a 4x5 and a digital SLR or who have gone from a 4x5 to digital.
There is no light meter in a 4x5. So you need to rely on an external metering system to get correct exposures. I use a Sekonic L558R.
The question is do you still use your external metering system you have/had with your 4x5 when you use your digital? By putting the meter on manual and using a hand held light meter to determine the exposure. Or do you rely on the internal light meter? Considered that you have mastered metering when you used your 4x5 you'd only want to verify the exposure by checking the histogram. Which system, external or internal, do you find more dependable?
This leads to more questions but I will leave that for now.
If you can take the time to make multiple exposures (as in no fast action), the histogram features built into most any digital camera is your best metering tool. It not only tells you what the mid-tone exposure should be (as with the handheld meter) but what was actually captured by the sensor. In other words you know whether the scene fits within the camera's dynamic range, whether your shadows/highlights are under/over exposed etc. With film you need to memorize keep in mind your specific film's latitude and factor it along with the reading and zone placement into your final exposure.
I know of some photographers who use a handheld meter with digital (not surprisingly, some who are actually affiliated with Sekonic). Still, I have yet to hear of a digital exposure workflow for a camera with built-in metering that absolutely requires a handheld meter.
Guy pretty well nailed it for general nature shooting.
We're a special case because we also do a lot of work with lights- both indoors and out- and manual settings. We use our Sekonic 508's to set up the lighting, adjust lighting ratios, balance indoor and outdoor lighting when matching indoor illumination to show views through windows along with indoor scenes, etc. Basically, if we turn on a strobe other than a camera mounted strobe for fill we turn on our 508's. Even then we use the histograms on our various cameras to confirm the lighting in our shots after setting them up with the 508. Without the need to meter strobes, the contemporary DSLR is a pretty complete package without a handheld meter.
- - - If you have used a 4x5 then you are sure to know how to test for correct exposure/developing settings for the other meter. (dialing in for the films ASA, meter, camera, and dev. needs)
So why don't you just test both the same way and use whatever one gives you the best results?
That will also tell you which to use in different conditions and locations.
Then again, you are talking about digital. It does not matter which one is more dependable.
This isn't rocket science. Just use BOTH.
Then just check the histogram and keep the image file that looks best, and delete the other one,
no matter what meter was used.
Personally, I only use spot meters, and will only buy a camera that has it. Then a hand held meter is never even looked at unless used as a back up for some reason, and even then that will be a spot meter.
Posted by Eric Fredine on August 7, 2006 at 6:18 PM
I'm with Guy on this one Will.
In my early 'film' days I carried my 1Ds and used it as a metering device for my film camera. But, I found that the 'best' exposure for the 1Ds wasn't the same as the best (or correct) exposure for film.
So, I have 2 different work-flows. If I'm shooting film I meter with my hand-held meter and make the exposure. If I'm shooting a digital camera I use the camera's meter, check the histogram and adjust if necessary.
Thank you all. It is too bad my Sekonic L558R does not have a histogram featured on it. But it does have a spot meter mode which I use almost all of the time.
Obviously when I get a DSLR I will be using it to its fullest extent I just hope I will still stay devouted to my 4x5 too .
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
Posted by Dan Borzynski on August 8, 2006 at 11:25 AM
Once I learned how to use the spot meter, I have found it easier to use a handheld meter for large format and the built in meter for 35 mm (or its digital equivalent).
There was a bit of a learning curve on using the handheld meter, but that was more because I have almost always used Canon's evaluative metering. I know, some of you are cringing at that thought, but my first camera, the Elan 7, didn't have spot metering. I learned, through some practice, just how the camera metering would react under the conditions I used it.
The big thing is to understand how whatever metering system you choose works. I'd rather not be messing with two different camera systems in the field, so it is generally a "digital" day or a "4x5" day. I understand my Sekonic and I understand the Canon evaluative metering and could mix and match the two, but then it is just more crap to carry.
Discussion
7 repliesThere is no light meter in a 4x5. So you need to rely on an external metering system to get correct exposures. I use a Sekonic L558R.
The question is do you still use your external metering system you have/had with your 4x5 when you use your digital? By putting the meter on manual and using a hand held light meter to determine the exposure. Or do you rely on the internal light meter? Considered that you have mastered metering when you used your 4x5 you'd only want to verify the exposure by checking the histogram. Which system, external or internal, do you find more dependable?
This leads to more questions but I will leave that for now.
Thank you for your response.
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
I know of some photographers who use a handheld meter with digital (not surprisingly, some who are actually affiliated with Sekonic). Still, I have yet to hear of a digital exposure workflow for a camera with built-in metering that absolutely requires a handheld meter.
Guy
We're a special case because we also do a lot of work with lights- both indoors and out- and manual settings. We use our Sekonic 508's to set up the lighting, adjust lighting ratios, balance indoor and outdoor lighting when matching indoor illumination to show views through windows along with indoor scenes, etc. Basically, if we turn on a strobe other than a camera mounted strobe for fill we turn on our 508's. Even then we use the histograms on our various cameras to confirm the lighting in our shots after setting them up with the 508. Without the need to meter strobes, the contemporary DSLR is a pretty complete package without a handheld meter.
So why don't you just test both the same way and use whatever one gives you the best results?
That will also tell you which to use in different conditions and locations.
Then again, you are talking about digital. It does not matter which one is more dependable.
This isn't rocket science. Just use BOTH.
Then just check the histogram and keep the image file that looks best, and delete the other one,
no matter what meter was used.
Personally, I only use spot meters, and will only buy a camera that has it. Then a hand held meter is never even looked at unless used as a back up for some reason, and even then that will be a spot meter.
In my early 'film' days I carried my 1Ds and used it as a metering device for my film camera. But, I found that the 'best' exposure for the 1Ds wasn't the same as the best (or correct) exposure for film.
So, I have 2 different work-flows. If I'm shooting film I meter with my hand-held meter and make the exposure. If I'm shooting a digital camera I use the camera's meter, check the histogram and adjust if necessary.
Cheers,
Eric
Obviously when I get a DSLR I will be using it to its fullest extent
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
There was a bit of a learning curve on using the handheld meter, but that was more because I have almost always used Canon's evaluative metering. I know, some of you are cringing at that thought, but my first camera, the Elan 7, didn't have spot metering. I learned, through some practice, just how the camera metering would react under the conditions I used it.
The big thing is to understand how whatever metering system you choose works. I'd rather not be messing with two different camera systems in the field, so it is generally a "digital" day or a "4x5" day. I understand my Sekonic and I understand the Canon evaluative metering and could mix and match the two, but then it is just more crap to carry.