A Question Regarding Sekonic L-358

After having some "intense" back and forths with Alfred and Fabiola over on DPR some months back relative to metering, I decided to by a light meter and see if it might make my shooting any more predictable. I've used matrix with EV compensation very sucessfully for lost of years but when I sat back and read Alrfreds and Fabs posts again, there are times when metering for the light may well work better.

This was brought about mainly due to the fact the the D300 which I'm not shooting, has a metering system completely different from the previous D2 series I was shooting, relative to using matrix and EV compensation.

Being old enough to realize that I don't know everything, I bought a Sekonik L-358 meter at the advise of Chas over on Naturescapes.

The book is pretty easy...the meter is pretty easy, yet I'm consistently blowing highlights, even when using the guidelines given to me by Chas.

A) Yup.....I'm reading the light pointed straight down the axis of the came (from the source)

B) What I;m wondering is...does each meter need to be calibrated to match your cameras metering system? Just because the D300 is set to ISO 800, it doesn't necessarily mean it's equivalent to ISO 80 on the 358 I would guess.

C) When using a TC...is f5.6 still f5.6 on the meter or is it really f4, given the light loss by utilizing the TC?

Thanks in advance...

JF

To answer your list:
A. Good
B. No calibration per se to camera meter
C. It's f/5.6

If anything my L-358 results with a slight underexposure (I like to push the histogram to the right). I generally compensate with +1/3 or 2/3. I make no other adjustments for the setup I'm using and transfer the L-358 reading directly to my camera in manual mode. (1DIIN,500 /f/4 usually always 1.4 ext).

The L-358 does have the abilty to set exposure compensations (in memory) which are applied to all readings thereafter (see manual). I would meter a white object, transfer the setting to the camera and using the result set the appropiate -/+ compensation.

Hi Jim,

Glad you made it here.
I apologize for the intensity of our interaction LOL

I never use a hand held meter and am very happy with Nikon's matrix.

Red carpet welcome and looking forward to share more of your Nikon experience :D

The meter is calibrated at a middle tone value.
If you are photographing a middle tone subject, you are good to go.
If your subject is white, take 1 to 11/3 stops of light away or - compensation.
And if you have a darker than middle tone subject, you would add light to the base reading.

James

So.....you are metering 30 degrees of the horizon and adding +.66 or a full stop depending on the luminousity oif the subject....or?

Agree with Jimmie. One point though, in the past Nikons metering did not always agree with a Incident meter reading. I think because of grey card values. There is a wealth of info on this here but a bit complicated;

http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpki...alibration.pdf

Bottom line is Canon is closer to Incident meter Nikon is about 12% Grey, Canon about 18% so this is where you get the 1/3 to 1/2 stop difference.

Now, not sure this carries over to the D300 and D3 yet....still have to play.

That's my routine, though I find Nikon's meter to handle subject's color variations better than Canon.

Hi James.....

That's pretty darn close to what I was seeing....just about -1.3 to not blow the whites on an eider male.

Now, theoretically, should that eider be sitting on water, flying against a blue sky or having green pines behind it, the exposure on the bird should be consistent in all cases....correct?

Welcome Jim !!!! Nice to have you here at BPN!!!!

I still use the camera meter and change between Av and M most of the time I am using a D3 and D300 which I find require less compensation than Canon

For subjects that are in the same light manual seems to work well Once you dial in an exposure it does not vary

I do shoot with Chas on a regular basis He nails the exp just about any time He does things different than most ex used lots of spot metering that I never use Results is what counts and he gets them

You are correct Sir.
As long as the light falling does not change the exposure stays the same.

I used to use incident light meters 20 years ago and I still have one but with the excellent meters in todays cameras I find that in most siturations I can do as well metering with my in camera evaluative and its heck of lost faster.. I've had people on workshops who insist on using the incident meters missing great shots because there messing around with their meter. In rapidly changing light they are a real pain... If things get a bit tricky exposure wise I just go to spot and meter a certain tonality and put it where I want it.

I just wanted to confirm James' suggestions. I use an incident meter and the 1 to 1 /13 stop less light for whites is my basic compensation. I also add 1 stop for a dark/black bird w/o predominate white.

Jim,

You should be pointing the incident meter dome directly at the light source, the sun on sunny days. Check the histogram, or LCD blinking highlights for clipping. Note the exposure difference necessary to bring the histogram back off the right side FOR WHITE HIGHLIGHTS.
The angle of the white relative to the light source can vary the comp exposure a bit. Most Nikon's and Canon vary .7 EV in sunlight. Although, the new D3 now appears to be similar.

BTW- you should not need a meter in sunlight!!!!

FYI- I use whatever meter pattern and meter mode best suites the circumstance, be it spot, eval/matrix, incident and/or reference values.

Note- with subjects containing white it is best not to under expose the the entire image more than is necessary not to clip the highlights. Rendering the highlight detail in RAW conversion or via selecting and modifing the highlights in CS3 is better than having to lighten the shadows in post-production.

Spend a day with me and all will come to light. Knowing the midtone will set you free.
Metering need not be complicated once you understand how it all works.

Respectfully,

Chas

My wife got me an L-758 a while back, but the book drives me nuts. Way over my head for some reason. I need to figure it out soon though.