[rollei_list] Re: F16 Rule was Re: New Pics Posted....Rolleiflex and Zeiss Ikon images..
- From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 07:54:00 -0800
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Davis" <jamesd@xxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 1:55 AM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: F16 Rule was Re: New Pics
Posted....Rolleiflex and Zeiss Ikon images..
redleica wrote:
I can understand that western meters read inaccuratly as
they are not very accurate with a wide acceptance angle.
One can eliminate all the guess work in metering by
getting one resonably accurate spot meter and calibrating
from its readings.
I conclude that good enough is not good enough for
metering and then using aRollei, surely this defeats the
object of using this fine instument.
I have a Weston Master II meter and never had any real
problems with it,
usually got exposures as good as I think I can get. The
process does
involve waving the meter around a fair bit, looking and
*thinking* about
the light falling on the subject and taking that into
account when
looking at the reading but the numbers have successfully
been translated
onto my Rolleiflex without any correction factor.
I have calibrated my meter, checking it against two others
which wasn't
a particularly difficult process. Recently I've bought a
Sekonic meter
as I wanted incident and spot metering functions. It's
certainly better
in scenes of high contrast or where the light is below 1.6
lumen where
it was difficult to accurately read the scale on the
Master II.
Just my 2p.
James
Try comparing the Weston against some other reflection
meter on a gray or white card or other large, uniform,
surface. Set the other meter for some convenient ISO speed
value, say 100, and see what the Weston must be set at to
give the same exposure reading. I've tried this with three
Westons old enough to be calibrated for Weston speeds and
found the above. I am curious if others can duplicate this.
The reason for using the large surface is to eliminate
any differences in reading due to differences in angle of
view.
A note: I've checked the meters for problems with the
cell. This is easy to do for a Selenium meter which has
overlaping ranges. Choose a brightness that falls into both
ranges at the overlap. The meter should read exactly the
same on both ranges. If the cell has gone bad it will read 1
or more stops low for the low range (that is where the meter
reads high on the scale). Weston cells seem to be among the
more durable.
Another note: Weston meters sometimes become erratic.
I've found that this can often be corrrected by pushing in
on the cell and rotating it a little. Evidently, the contact
at the edge becomes intermittant with time. Excercizing it
will bring it back. This will NOT fix a non-linear cell.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
