Can I use my Nikon D3 built-in lightmeter to determine my exposure for my 4x5 film camera? What about its spot meter?
From my experience with the D3, I found that in general it add about 1 - 0.7 EV, maybe because with digital it is good to go toward the right of the histogram to reveal more detail. I do compensate to lower its meter about (- 0.7 ) in order to show the right exposure of the scene.
I was wondering if such compensation would bring my DSLR meter to read accurate light value (I am talking of matrix and CW). I think spot is good for other use regardless of the recording medium. Am I right here?
I use a handheld Pentax digital spotmeter for my 4x5 work. I use the Zone System of exposure, so I need to be able to determine the Exposure Value (EV) of selected areas within the scene; primarily the deepest shadow value where I want detail, brightest highlight value where I want detail.
If you are using transparency film, you will expose for the high values because you want to have some texture there. The shadow values (and other values) will then fall somewhere on the tonal scale. If you use your camera's meter in 'spot' mode you will be able to determine the dynamic range of the scene. With transparency film, the dynamic range will be about 4 stops. Color negative films, and B&W films, are exposed for the shadows and typically have a greater effective dynamic range.
You could use a matrix mode, as well, but these modes give an 'average' exposure for the scene, as you know, and won't tell you if your high and low values will be acceptably exposed. Testing is the only way to know for sure
I suggest that you run some tests using the film(s) you want to use to calibrate your in-camera meter for use with film. You may, or may not need to use compensation based upon the results of your testing.
Personally, I prefer my handheld meter. It is small and light, and easy to use. My LF kit is heavy enough without carrying another camera just to use as meter. I suggest that you take a look at purchasing a handheld meter for your LF work. Using one will make life easier in the long run, in my opinion.
I'm with Preston. Different handheld meter (Sekonic), but same reasoning. Another "small" deal to talk about but a big one to content with when you're tired, distracted, or just plain prone to math errors: Your Nikon meter is going to max out at the smallest aperture of the particular lens on the body at the moment, usually no smaller than f/32 and more often f/22. Start playing with f/45 or f/64, and you'll be playing mind games to make the conversion. You can read those directly off the handheld meter.
I've tried metering with a D40 in matrix mode for Reala in 6x6 and the results were great, just as expected. The negative film has more latitude of course.
Posted by Mark Stahlke on September 7, 2009 at 12:23 PM
I used a DSLR as a light meter for 4x5 with generally good results. Where I had problems was the math errors Hank mentioned. In addition to adjusting the exposure for an aperture smaller than the DSLR, I also had to adjust for a lower ISO. And then compensate for a polarizer. This was more than my little brain could handle. I screwed up too many exposures by getting the math wrong - adding when I should be subtracting or subtracting when I should be adding. Eventually I picked up a Pentax spot meter and now I have no excuse for my screwed up exposures.
Cheers.
Posted by Doug Andrews on September 7, 2009 at 12:36 PM
I use my D200 as a meter for my Fuji GW670 all the time. Like others said, be careful with your math when using something like Velvia 50 in your 4x5 and your DSLR only goes down to ISO 100. Other than that, its worked out great for me.
Posted by Harley Goldman on September 9, 2009 at 6:39 PM
What Preston said.
You can quite easily use the camera, but that is a lot of extra size and weight to drag around. I carry around plenty of large format stuff with me, so I really appreciate a light, small meter. I use a Pentax digital spot and essentially use the same methodology as Preston.
Small caveat: DSLRs manufacturers often "cheat" when it comes to ISO ratings. There was an article not too long ago where someone measured the actual sensitivity at each ISO level and found significant variance among various models. Some can be off by as much as a full stop. For film photography, a hand held meter will be my recommendation as well (or a 35mm film SLR).
Also, for the same reason - using a hand held meter to determine digital exposure is not a good idea (despite being promoted by some pros who happen to be affiliated with meter manufacturers).
Guy
Posted by Mel Ladewig on September 9, 2009 at 11:25 PM
As a color photographer, I had alot of missed exposures when I was trying to use my DSLR as a light meter for 4X5. Digital capture is neither like slide or color negative film in its dynamic range. It sits somewhere in the middle. Add to that the point Guy made, that dSLRs often cheat the ISO ratings.
I've been much happier with my much smaller pentax digital spot meter. Its just easier to use. Simplifying the readings to EV makes it easier to calculate subject brightness range and choose the right film or filters. It also makes it easier to pick an exposure when you need to shoot at f32 or higher.
I recommend that you simplify your life. Get a dedicated light meter for the 4X5 and leave the dSLR at home when you want to use the large format.
Posted by Lon Overacker on September 10, 2009 at 2:41 AM
Mohsen,
If I summed up what everyone has said so far, that's what I would say. :-)
But having agreed with all that, you can use a dslr or slr camera to meter a scene. But if you do that I highly recommend Preston's suggestion and TEST your exposures. Test and record in mid-day daylight (Sunny 16) and compare your meter readings vs. how the film got exposed. take notes because obviously it will take a number of days before you get your film back unless you develop yourself.
I used my Nikon F4 for years before finally getting a spot meter just a couple years ago. Along with simple experience, the KEY is having a consistent method/practice on determining how YOU expose a scene - and believe me there's as many different ways to figure exposure for a scene as there are ways to compose it. :-)
But I think Mel says it best when he says to simplify things. One thing that I've found invaluable are the simple basics. "Sunny 16" for example. While I don't often shoot in sunny 16 light, just knowing a starting point can help by providing a sanity check, which is quite helpful with film and LF. Sometimes even the simple processes will let you successfully expose a scene even without a meter! :-)
Discussion
9 repliesCan I use my Nikon D3 built-in lightmeter to determine my exposure for my 4x5 film camera? What about its spot meter?
From my experience with the D3, I found that in general it add about 1 - 0.7 EV, maybe because with digital it is good to go toward the right of the histogram to reveal more detail. I do compensate to lower its meter about (- 0.7 ) in order to show the right exposure of the scene.
I was wondering if such compensation would bring my DSLR meter to read accurate light value (I am talking of matrix and CW). I think spot is good for other use regardless of the recording medium. Am I right here?
I appreciate any help.
Thanks
If you are using transparency film, you will expose for the high values because you want to have some texture there. The shadow values (and other values) will then fall somewhere on the tonal scale. If you use your camera's meter in 'spot' mode you will be able to determine the dynamic range of the scene. With transparency film, the dynamic range will be about 4 stops. Color negative films, and B&W films, are exposed for the shadows and typically have a greater effective dynamic range.
You could use a matrix mode, as well, but these modes give an 'average' exposure for the scene, as you know, and won't tell you if your high and low values will be acceptably exposed. Testing is the only way to know for sure
I suggest that you run some tests using the film(s) you want to use to calibrate your in-camera meter for use with film. You may, or may not need to use compensation based upon the results of your testing.
Personally, I prefer my handheld meter. It is small and light, and easy to use. My LF kit is heavy enough without carrying another camera just to use as meter. I suggest that you take a look at purchasing a handheld meter for your LF work. Using one will make life easier in the long run, in my opinion.
-P
Cheers.
You can quite easily use the camera, but that is a lot of extra size and weight to drag around. I carry around plenty of large format stuff with me, so I really appreciate a light, small meter. I use a Pentax digital spot and essentially use the same methodology as Preston.
Also, for the same reason - using a hand held meter to determine digital exposure is not a good idea (despite being promoted by some pros who happen to be affiliated with meter manufacturers).
Guy
I've been much happier with my much smaller pentax digital spot meter. Its just easier to use. Simplifying the readings to EV makes it easier to calculate subject brightness range and choose the right film or filters. It also makes it easier to pick an exposure when you need to shoot at f32 or higher.
I recommend that you simplify your life. Get a dedicated light meter for the 4X5 and leave the dSLR at home when you want to use the large format.
If I summed up what everyone has said so far, that's what I would say. :-)
But having agreed with all that, you can use a dslr or slr camera to meter a scene. But if you do that I highly recommend Preston's suggestion and TEST your exposures. Test and record in mid-day daylight (Sunny 16) and compare your meter readings vs. how the film got exposed. take notes because obviously it will take a number of days before you get your film back unless you develop yourself.
I used my Nikon F4 for years before finally getting a spot meter just a couple years ago. Along with simple experience, the KEY is having a consistent method/practice on determining how YOU expose a scene - and believe me there's as many different ways to figure exposure for a scene as there are ways to compose it. :-)
But I think Mel says it best when he says to simplify things. One thing that I've found invaluable are the simple basics. "Sunny 16" for example. While I don't often shoot in sunny 16 light, just knowing a starting point can help by providing a sanity check, which is quite helpful with film and LF. Sometimes even the simple processes will let you successfully expose a scene even without a meter! :-)
Lon