Spot meters

[Olegis]

Since there is no real spot meter in any EOS model, except of the professional bodies, I'm curious - how many people here use hand-held meters ? Are they accurate ? Which models are recommended ? How do you know where exactly the meter is pointed, does it have some kind of view-finder ? Are analog meters any good, or do I have to start saving for the expensive digital one ?
Sorry for so many question :oops:

[Belmondo]

I have a couple Pentax Spotmeters...a digital and an older analog version. They both work well, but the digital seems to be a lot more consistent. I'd bite the bullet and buy digital just for the peace of mind that comes from the knowledge that you're getting more current technology.

They are very useful when you're really concerned with exposure, but I personally never saw anything wrong with bracketing, at least in a digital camera. Film is a slightly different story.

Tom

[scottbergerphoto]

Hand held meters are a must for studio flash and for complex lighting situations. I have the Sekonic L358(flash/incident/reflected) and L558(flash/incident/1 degree spot).

For a primer on using a meter:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/products/pdf/af9.pdf

Regards,
Scott

[Big_B]

Since there is no real spot meter in any EOS model, except of the professional bodies, I'm curious - how many people here use hand-held meters ? Are they accurate ? Which models are recommended ? How do you know where exactly the meter is pointed, does it have some kind of view-finder ? Are analog meters any good, or do I have to start saving for the expensive digital one ?
Sorry for so many question :oops:

I know even less about this then you do, so here's my stupid question for the day. What is wrong with the spot meters the EOS models?

[cmM]

I know even less about this then you do, so here's my stupid question for the day. What is wrong with the spot meters the EOS models?
There's nothing wrong with it if you can afford a 1DMKII :P
The lower models don't have it.

[Big_B]

I know even less about this then you do, so here's my stupid question for the day. What is wrong with the spot meters the EOS models?
There's nothing wrong with it if you can afford a 1DMKII :P
The lower models don't have it.

thanks - not sure I'll be doing that any time soon :P
What sorts of metering does the 10d have then?

[Jon]

It's "Partial area", covering about 12-15% of the viewing area. Handheld spot meters cover about a 1 degree field of view, allowing precise metering of selected spots.

[Big_B]

Gotcha. Thanks Jon!

[Olegis]

I have a couple Pentax Spotmeters...a digital and an older analog version. They both work well, but the digital seems to be a lot more consistent. I'd bite the bullet and buy digital just for the peace of mind that comes from the knowledge that you're getting more current technology.

They are very useful when you're really concerned with exposure, but I personally never saw anything wrong with bracketing, at least in a digital camera. Film is a slightly different story.

Tom

Thanks Tom.
I see it this way - with all the digital cameras I've had so far, the best method of getting the correct exposure was the following : shoot, evaluate the histogram, correct the exposure, shoot, avaluate the histogram ... Sometimes this process can take quite a long time untill you reach the best exposure, not to speak about complex lighting situations with high contrast areas. With a spot meter I had on my Olympus E20 I was able to check the whole range of stops in the scene, so I could decide on best exposure settings much quicker and more correctly.

Scott - the Sekonic L-558 Dualmaster costs $500 at B&H ! :shock:

[Jon]

Scott - the Sekonic L-558 Dualmaster costs $500 at B&H ! :shock:

Are you getting paid by the hour, or by the job? Scott's a pro, and getting the job right, fast, is money in the bank. Equipment, he can depreciate. If I was photographing (as Roger Hall says about writing) "for the sheer joy of getting paid" (not attributing this motive to Scott), I'd be using a spot meter religiously, too.

[DaveG]

Since there is no real spot meter in any EOS model, except of the professional bodies, I'm curious - how many people here use hand-held meters ? Are they accurate ? Which models are recommended ? How do you know where exactly the meter is pointed, does it have some kind of view-finder ? Are analog meters any good, or do I have to start saving for the expensive digital one ?
Sorry for so many question :oops:

You don't need a spot meter to use with a digital camera.

Your meter in your camera will get you very close and then an examination of the histogram will let you decide whether you want to modify the exposure. All you can do is to expose on, expose under or expose over. With film, as I written before, you were in the prediction business and a spot meter - in the right hands - let you predict a bit better than the camera's meter. But now you are in the review business.

Prediction was obviously needed for film but review is the happy reality of digital. I mean even if you did use a spot meter, think about your workflow. You'd set up the camera as the meter suggested, take the picture and then (unless you are a complete moron) you'd still check the histogram and bias the exposure based on that!

The only use for a hand held meter now is if it's an ambient flash meter and you use it to set lighting ratios with strobes.

[Olegis]

I'm not a pro, unfortunately. My main job is electronics engineer, photography is just a hobby ... :(

[Jesper]

Not a direct answer to your question, but I hope this will be helpful....: 8)

I've been struggling with my 10D a lot to get the exposure right. I used to use matrix metering all of the time, and often I've been disappointed because sometimes the camera seemed to go wild: on one photo the exposure was more or less OK, and on the next one of the same subject it suddenly overexposed and blew out a lot of the highlights, for example.

I've found out that I can get a much more accurate and consistent exposure with partial metering, by metering the highlights. I first meter the brightest area in the image by putting it in the center of the image (in the faint circle you can see in the viewfinder) and pressing the "*" (asterisk) button. Then I set exposure compensation, depending on how bright the area is. If it's very bright I set it to +1 1/3 or +1 2/3. If the bright area is smaller than the circle in the viewfinder and there are also some darker things in the circle, I set it a bit lower - remember that the camera takes the average brightness of what's in the circle. If the brightest area has average brightness I leave the exposure compensation on 0 or for a low-key image I even use negative exposure compensation. After setting the exposure compensation, I lock the exposure by pressing the "*" button again, then I re-compose, focus and shoot. Note that after pressing "*", the exposure is locked for about 6 seconds or so, so the camera won't re-meter when you half-press the shutter release button.

A spot meter will probably make it even more accurate, but I've found that using the partial meter this way gives me a close enough exposure most of the time. Ofcourse I check the exposure with the histogram afterwards and I look for the flashing blown out highlights indication.

[Olegis]

Thanks Jesper, I'll give your method a try in my next photo-shoot tomorrow :-)

[evilenglishman]

ive got the "baby" sekonic (308BII) and it works great.

[NILOLIGIST]

I use the Sekonic L358, it is a great meter at a great price. Unless you need spot metering this is a good deal.

NiL,

[Olegis]

Both the Seconic L358 and the 308BII are not spot meters - I was asking about spot meters in particular.

[MarkH]

Since there is no real spot meter in any EOS model, except of the professional bodies, I'm curious - how many people here use hand-held meters ? Are they accurate ? Which models are recommended ? How do you know where exactly the meter is pointed, does it have some kind of view-finder ? Are analog meters any good, or do I have to start saving for the expensive digital one ?
Sorry for so many question :oops:

You don't need a spot meter to use with a digital camera.

Your meter in your camera will get you very close and then an examination of the histogram will let you decide whether you want to modify the exposure. All you can do is to expose on, expose under or expose over. With film, as I written before, you were in the prediction business and a spot meter - in the right hands - let you predict a bit better than the camera's meter. But now you are in the review business.

Prediction was obviously needed for film but review is the happy reality of digital. I mean even if you did use a spot meter, think about your workflow. You'd set up the camera as the meter suggested, take the picture and then (unless you are a complete moron) you'd still check the histogram and bias the exposure based on that!

The only use for a hand held meter now is if it's an ambient flash meter and you use it to set lighting ratios with strobes.

I have to agree with Dave here! With practice you can get very quick at shooting, reviewing and adjusting settings.

In high contrast or tricky lighting situations I use the M setting to give me full control and I find I can quickly adjust the settings to get the histogram correct. I can't see how any meter can be more accurate than the histogram!

[Jon]

I have to agree with Dave here! With practice you can get very quick at shooting, reviewing and adjusting settings.

In high contrast or tricky lighting situations I use the M setting to give me full control and I find I can quickly adjust the settings to get the histogram correct. I can't see how any meter can be more accurate than the histogram!

Not necessarily more accurate, just getting you into the ballpark faster. Although with extreme contrast situations, you may be left with a histogram that clips at both ends. Your spot meter will have already told you this would happen since your highlight and shadow readings were, say, 10 stops apart. And if I'm photographing any kind of dynamic scene ( motorsport, airshow, scenic with sunlight and cumulus, waterbirds . . . ), I want to know I'm going to have the exposure right the first time, since my subject isn't going to back up for me.

[Olegis]

I agree with Jon. I'm talking about things that can be problematic to shoot over and over again, like sports or concerts. With spot meter I can predict the most correct exposure before the opportunity to shoot occurs. If you miss the first time - you miss the shot, the subject may never "compose itself into the right shot".

[DaveG]

I agree with Jon. I'm talking about things that can be problematic to shoot over and over again, like sports or concerts. With spot meter I can predict the most correct exposure before the opportunity to shoot occurs. If you miss the first time - you miss the shot, the subject may never "compose itself into the right shot".

Yes but you take some practice shots before the action begins, adjust the shutterspeed/aperture until things look good on the histogram and shoot. If you don't have time to do this you certainly don't have time to use spot meter either.

[Olegis]

That's what I do now without the spot meter, but I thought that with it I would be able to determine the exposure value more precisely from the start - that would be faster than cut-and-try approach I use today.

[Jon]

I agree with Jon. I'm talking about things that can be problematic to shoot over and over again, like sports or concerts. With spot meter I can predict the most correct exposure before the opportunity to shoot occurs. If you miss the first time - you miss the shot, the subject may never "compose itself into the right shot".

Yes but you take some practice shots before the action begins, adjust the shutterspeed/aperture until things look good on the histogram and shoot. If you don't have time to do this you certainly don't have time to use spot meter either.

Besides, lighting conditions do change - it's easier to bang off a couple of new spot readings than to chimp at the exposure on an LCD that may be unreadable in the sunlight . . .

[CyberDyneSystems]

I've found out that I can get a much more accurate and consistent exposure with partial metering, by metering the highlights. .

Ditto.. I have the 10D on "partial" 98% of the time and love the results. With the occasional matrix use for landscapes.

On the MkII it is not so easy.. I switch between all FOUR modes on the MkII, and have to check the histogram much more often.. I'm getting beter though.. and am now relyig on partial for the MkII a lot more often as I get used to the differences.

[J Rabin]

Oleg.
Everyone has given good opinions. Jesper's comments instructive. Are you sure you want a spot meter? From your wonderful posts, most have been posed or casual model shots, street shots, etc.
A spot meter is a reflected light meter, already the SAME type of meter in SLRs. A famous one is the old Pentax 1-degree spot. Most people doing studio or outdoor "people" photog use ambient/incident light meters (like the Seconics, Gossens, etc.). You put the dome under the person's chin, point at the camera lens on axis, and meter, or flash meter. Check out Smartshooter.com website for review.
The 1-2-5-degree reflected spot is essential in landscapes or macro, when you have time, the camera on a tripod, and can meter wide f/stop range or high contrast situations to properly expose light and shadows. This does not sound like what you're doing from the nice posts.
If you're going to point a spot at someone moving in a concert, under low light, and changing light, and you're too far for flash, you're as likely to have exposure success with the partial 9.X% reflected meter in the Canon 10D SLR as dropping $250-$450 on a spot meter.
Years ago, when I shot landscapes in Israel, I used a spot meter all the time. Beige and grey stone, bright sand, blue water and sky, green plants with red and blue flowers and tanned people. All that contrast and range cried out for deciding what was most important and metering it for slide film, WHEN SHOOTING AT A DISTANCE.
Carrying and using a spot meter for on-the-go photography did not work. After joy with Canon digital, I've bought a used Canon EOS 3 film body as a backup body INSTEAD of a spot meter. It costs the same as meter, has a 2.X% spot/multi-spot meter compared to my 10D's 9.X% partial meter in a beautiful bright viewfinder. A backup to the 10D. For high contrast/high f/stop range street photography, I load it with Fuji Astia slide film (like shooting digital with less risk of losing highlights). For high contrast landscapes, Fuji Provia 100F slide film. We have a Nikon slide scanner at work.
I use the EOS 3 to meter, and still shoot digital. For salty coast, or sand, or bicycle races in the rain, OR LOW LIGHT, EOS 3 comes out. In Israel I used to send 35 mm SLR back to the states every 6 months for rebuilds to remove sand and grit. Lens zooming made grinding sounds! Outdoors is rough and the EOS3 is better than the 10D. I have access to a scanner. I can't afford the Mark II. Heavy. It has the same 2.X% spot as EOS3, on steroids.
So. EOS 3 = spot at $450 used. Digital Mark II = same spot at $4,500. Spot meter = reflected spot at $300-$450 with not much chance of improved exposures for on-the-go photography. I find EOS 3 best film body I owned. Maybe one of the best film SLRs ever made for the money.
IMHO

[J Rabin]

Oleg.
Not sure if others answered this part of your question: The spot meters Ive used have a little viewfinder that look through to aim at "distant" target to meter and hit the trigger button. As I noted above, for my use better suited to distant subject matter 50 or 100m to 5,000m and >. I never found a way to use it close in, on the go. The multi-spot in the EOS 3, which is SAME as in Mark II is easier and faster. Then you release shutter and move on.
I don't complain or participate to forum wish lists, but maybe this is why so many Canon forum members desire a digital EOS 3? I've just stayed with film for it along with digital.

[J Rabin]

Oleg:
You've got me thinking about experiences. Spot meter personal case. At a bass fishing tournement. Intense bright sunlight. 25m+/- from person landing a shiny fish in a metal boat. Reflections and specular highlights. He's got a light T-shirt, tan skin, and face partially obscured under a cap (too far for fill-flash). Another 10m+ in background is green vegetation on shoreline. You want that blurred. Shutter speed is like 1/2000+ and f/5.6 on manual or Av with polarizer.
What do I meter and how? On my 10D, I've tried partial metering the T-shirt with +EC, but still lost highlights and detail in the fish. No +EC and the face is obscured. Meter the face, or meter the face with -EC and lose other details because the 10D partial meter is not small enough and meters background. Aim at the fish and nothing is right because it reflects too much water. Try and pick one manual setting fails because when boat moves, light changes big.
But, I don't want to put the camera down to mess with a spot meter! With Canon EOS 3 you take the critical meterings with 2.X% spot setting and camera INSTANTLY AUTO averages them. I shoot that with film, and/or set the 10D on Av or manual to same with an -1/2EC to avoid losing too many specular highlights that can't be recovered.
I'm not pro, so I can't afford a digital Mark II. A used EOS 3 has same spot at 1/10 price. It works.
J

[Olegis]

Thanks, J Rabin.
I've decided to improve my metering skills with what I've got instead of spending more money on a spot meter. Your idea of getting an old pro EOS body for metering is sure interesting, but I guess that I won't spend the money on that either. Maybe someday, after I get all the lenses I want ... 8)

Again, thanks a lot.

[DaveG]

Oleg:
You've got me thinking about experiences. Spot meter personal case. At a bass fishing tournement. Intense bright sunlight. 25m+/- from person landing a shiny fish in a metal boat. Reflections and specular highlights. He's got a light T-shirt, tan skin, and face partially obscured under a cap (too far for fill-flash). Another 10m+ in background is green vegetation on shoreline. You want that blurred. Shutter speed is like 1/2000+ and f/5.6 on manual or Av with polarizer.
What do I meter and how? On my 10D, I've tried partial metering the T-shirt with +EC, but still lost highlights and detail in the fish. No +EC and the face is obscured. Meter the face, or meter the face with -EC and lose other details because the 10D partial meter is not small enough and meters background. Aim at the fish and nothing is right because it reflects too much water. Try and pick one manual setting fails because when boat moves, light changes big.
But, I don't want to put the camera down to mess with a spot meter! With Canon EOS 3 you take the critical meterings with 2.X% spot setting and camera INSTANTLY AUTO averages them. I shoot that with film, and/or set the 10D on Av or manual to same with an -1/2EC to avoid losing too many specular highlights that can't be recovered.
I'm not pro, so I can't afford a digital Mark II. A used EOS 3 has same spot at 1/10 price. It works.
J

One over the ISO @ f16. Try it. If the ISO is correct on the camera that's your sunny 16 rule. That - or the 10D's meter - will get you very close and that's all that a spot meter will do too.

Your example is a very difficult shot for digital to handle. There is an extreme contrast range as you indicated and digital, like transparency film, doesn't have the latitude to handle these extremes and in particular it will not going to forgive overexposure. So faces under ball caps have to be sacrificed for the good of the entire image.

Now whether I did a test shot using the sunny 16 rule, the 10D's meter, or a spot meter; I would still check the histogram, to see what I got, not what the meter tells me I should have. This test shot would be done while nothing much is going on. That time needs to be there. If it isn't I couldn't check the hsitogram, but there also would be no time to use a spot meter either.

If the over all exposure is 1/100 @ f16 all the spot meter is going to tell me is that the guy's face needs 1/100 @ f8 1/2, while the fish may be 1/500 @ f16. How do I fix this? I can't expose for the fish, it would kill all the shadow detail. If I expose for the face I over expose everything else - ESPECIALLY the specular highlights that in this case include the fish.

Once again though, wouldn't you check the histogram after the spot meter let you know it's opinon? And then you are right back to this choice of under or over exposure based on that.

Save the trouble and live with the meter in the 10D and the histogram. And maybe think of using some fill flash. :D

[DaveG]

Oleg:
You've got me thinking about experiences. Spot meter personal case. At a bass fishing tournement. Intense bright sunlight. 25m+/- from person landing a shiny fish in a metal boat. Reflections and specular highlights. He's got a light T-shirt, tan skin, and face partially obscured under a cap (too far for fill-flash). Another 10m+ in background is green vegetation on shoreline. You want that blurred. Shutter speed is like 1/2000+ and f/5.6 on manual or Av with polarizer.
What do I meter and how? On my 10D, I've tried partial metering the T-shirt with +EC, but still lost highlights and detail in the fish. No +EC and the face is obscured. Meter the face, or meter the face with -EC and lose other details because the 10D partial meter is not small enough and meters background. Aim at the fish and nothing is right because it reflects too much water. Try and pick one manual setting fails because when boat moves, light changes big.
But, I don't want to put the camera down to mess with a spot meter! With Canon EOS 3 you take the critical meterings with 2.X% spot setting and camera INSTANTLY AUTO averages them. I shoot that with film, and/or set the 10D on Av or manual to same with an -1/2EC to avoid losing too many specular highlights that can't be recovered.
I'm not pro, so I can't afford a digital Mark II. A used EOS 3 has same spot at 1/10 price. It works.
J

One over the ISO @ f16. Try it. If the ISO is correct on the camera that's your sunny 16 rule. That - or the 10D's meter - will get you very close and that's all that a spot meter will do too.

Your example is a very difficult shot for digital to handle. There is an extreme contrast range as you indicated and digital, like transparency film, doesn't have the latitude to handle these extremes and in particular it will not going to forgive overexposure. So faces under ball caps have to be sacrificed for the good of the entire image.

Now whether I did a test shot using the sunny 16 rule, the 10D's meter, or a spot meter; I would still check the histogram, to see what I got, not what the meter tells me I should have. This test shot would be done while nothing much is going on. That time needs to be there. If it isn't I couldn't check the hsitogram, but there also would be no time to use a spot meter either.

If the over all exposure is 1/100 @ f16 all the spot meter is going to tell me is that the guy's face needs 1/100 @ f8 1/2, while the fish may be 1/500 @ f16. How do I fix this? I can't expose for the fish, it would kill all the shadow detail. If I expose for the face I over expose everything else - ESPECIALLY the specular highlights that in this case include the fish.

Once again though, wouldn't you check the histogram after the spot meter let you know it's opinon? And then you are right back to this choice of under or over exposure based on that.

Save the trouble and live with the meter in the 10D and the histogram. And maybe think of using some fill flash. :D

[J Rabin]

Thanks Dave.
Yes, I should try more with Sunny f/16 by 1/ISO. When too far for fill flash, or it's distracting, shadow detail in a face under cap is sacrificed. Ugly, but sacrificed.
I agreed with posters to Oleg: a reflected spot meter is not best for on-the-go photog. Mastering the reflected partial meter in the camera is.
I never had as much trouble metering shooting slides for 30 years as I do with Canon 10D. For the bass tournement, Fuji Astia slide film does an nice job tolerating extreme contrast. Kodachrome does amazing things. As amateur, most of my photog is outdoor candids. I'm not quitting film yet. People who say metering digital is intolerantly similar to slides are either avid landscape photogs, who exert much time on single shots, or are people who have not shot a lot of slides. I find slide film much more tolerant than digital.
Also, was pointing out to Oleg my experience that handheld viewfinder spot meters are better used on distant objects that do not move (landscapes).

Response to Oleg... rather than worry about hand held spot meter, check out Norman Koran on implementing zone thinking for digital at:
http://www.normankoren.com/zonesystem.html
http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html

[J Rabin]

Dave:
You mention using 10D partial then checking histogram. I've been fooled, duped, by this. There are outdoor scenes, e.g., strongly sun backlit female face in shadows, where my post shot histogram of the "whole scene" looks balanced and fine across the spectrum on camera LCD, but when opened in PSCS Raw, the face is underexposed (even with some fill flash) by a whole stop+.
The test I use on faces is the quick PS "face histogram" technique for portrait photography recommended on smartshooter.com.
To master this challenge, I'm trying P.K. Frary's E-TTL technique of:
1. turn off flash; 2. meter the scene; 3. Set f and shutter in manual mode; 4. turn on flash and fire ignoring the 10D meter.
It works better, but then the subject... she's walked off......
Jack

[Adam Hicks]

I'm just jumping in here, but am I the only one around here who uses an 18% card in tough lighting situations? I think it's a really handy tool and a lot cheaper than a light meter :-)

If I need to spot meter I'll simply fill the frame with my subject in Av or Tv mode, remember the settings and pop over to M mode duplicating those settings. It's worked well for me in highly backlit situations where the camera's meter would have underexposed the subject.

I'm certainly no professional, but for $5 I've been able to handle most nasty situations with the grey card and cameras metering using a manual spot meter process. The grey card is definitely handy when shooting high contrast situations (like a wedding dress next to a black tux)

Or so goes my experience!

Adam

[J Rabin]

Adam:
Yes, gray card, palm of hand, green grass, etc. work when the light falling around me is similar to the light intensity and contrast range of light falling around subject.
The spot meter challenge is when the the subject is some distance, and under different, more complex light and shadow. It's a challenge.

J

[Adam Hicks]

I can see that it would certainly be a challenge then. I suppose all you can do in that situation is bracket bracket bracket :)