I used an incident meter a lot with my Leica M3 and its wide angle
clip on CdS meter. It was wonderful for placing values in the slide
film so that they looked like what I had seen. I used it less with
the Canon F1 because its center metering mode got me closer than the
meter on the Leica. The multi-spot metering of the OM4T just
eliminated the need to carry the hand held meter, at least for me.
The histogram on my DSLR even after the fact in combination with the
ability to delete the bad exposure is just so much more accurate than
any of the preceding methods. Even the matrix metering gives such a
high percentage of good exposures, that the incident meter only comes
out if I should want to use my remaining OM1n or one of the Mamiyas.
I think the very light and very dark warning is overstated and is
directly related, I think, to the limited exposure range of reversal
film. I think it is unnecessary for the slightly wider range of
digital and the even wider range of negative film.
One of the instructions I remember for an incident meter was to point
it between the light source and the camera, not directly to the
camera. With reversal film you wanted to expose for the highlights,
like digital, and reducing the size of the shadow on the light
diffusion dome on the meter by raising it accomplished that letting
the shadows fall where they would. That also further reduced the need
to futz with an override for very dark or very light.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Sep 4, 2006, at 11:19 AM, Jay Drew wrote:
> An incident meter eliminates one step in
> the process, it automatically places values where they occur so you
> GENERALLY
> don't have to worry about the reflectance of the subject UNLESS IT
> IS VERY LIGHT
> OR VERY DARK. (The caps emphasis is mine)
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|