Advice needed on Hasselblad and Mamiya exposure meters

[Guy Mancuso]

As a general rule most meters are designed with center weight metering and even matrix metering tend to be more aimed towards the bottom slighty. Reason is landscapes since usually there is more sky in the images. So most OEMs have been following that standard for many years. Even matrix metering as much as you think it would even out more it still is mainly weighted towards center bottom. In a word it is not really accurate but it works out in general as the best compromise . To truly work within the zone system a spot meter is required. Where you can measure the whole zone system which I think is a 8 stop range of metering points. I may have that number wrong. Your testing my memory. LOL


The key here is a compromise on adjustments. Which photography as a whole is compromising one thing or another to fit your art.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Found it and looks like it can go on a kindle

http://www.amazon.com/Zone-VI-Workshop-Fred-Picker/dp/0817405747

 

[Cindy Flood]

The book "Zone System" by Brian Lav is excellent. He explains how to calibrate the meter and rate your film. This book is very pricey, but I watched for a used one on Amazon.com and was finally able to get the book for less than $10. You also could check out "The Negative" by Ansel Adams from your local library.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Than read my quote below, it IS what photography is all about. Experiment it is truly the only purest way to learn.

 

[ghoonk]

waitaminute - the ZS is used for metering with B&W film.

And it's used because if a scene has areas that are dark, medium and bright, one needs to be careful not to meter on the 'wrong' thing, which would result in either shadows lost or highlights blown. It's a way to 'balance' out the range in B&W photography.

In the same way that I would spot meter the sky that is backlighting my subject to create a silhouette (dark shadows with no detail, but texture shows up in the sky behind him/her), or to use the other extreme, I would meter for my subject, and let the sky blow out (behaving like a white backdrop). in these two cases, there isn't much of a middle ground.

But let's say I have a street scene that is lit by harsh midday sun. There's a veranda overhanging past a storefront, with an old guy on a rocking chair smoking his pipe in the shade. Inside the shop are pretty deep shadows.

In this case, if I wanted to expose the scene 'properly' to capture the old guy, I could meter him if I wanted to expose some bits inside the shop, or I could expose slightly closer to the edge where the sun is getting into the veranda, which would expose the old guy, but I would risk a bit of shadow for a bit of the sky.

But here's the doozy:

We're assuming hat one meter is the same as the next. That's pretty much been my assumption up until I read that article (see post #1 in this thread) where I learn that the meter on the Zeiss Ikon / Voigtlander Bessa cameras are 'calibrated' for slide film. Based on my experience and what I've been told about slide film, I should be careful not to overexposure, so I don't end up with blown highlights. If this is the case, then I'm guessing that the recommended exposure from the meter is actually 1/3 to 2/3 stop underexposed, as compared to if I were shooting with film, vis a vis, if I were to shoot with film, I 'should' overexpose against the recommended setting (let's say 1/125) by shooting at 1/80 or 1/100 at the same aperture.

Now, if the Voigtlander meters were calibrated for slide film (hence readings tend to result in a slight underexposure when used on negative film), then I have three choices when using the same camera to shoot with negative film - either I

a. set the camera's ISO dial to 1/3 to 2/3 stop slow (i.e. ISO320 when using ISO400 film, and tell the lab to develop as ISO320), or
b. set exposure compensation to +1/3 to +2/3, or
c. manually 'add' 1/3 to 2/3 stops by opening up the aperture or slowing the shutter for every shot.

Now, if this was the case with Voigtlander, does anyone know if the meters on the RZ67 AE prism finder, the Hasselblad PME5, the Mamiya 645AFD II, Nikon, etc are similarly calibrated for slide or negative film?

Or is a meter a meter, and regardless of the brand/model, at a given/specific EV (e.g. EV10), f/8 would ALWAYS yield 1/125 on ISO100?

 

[ghoonk]

Than read my quote below, it IS what photography is all about. Experiment it is truly the only purest way to learn.

That's true as well. Guess I have to sacrifice a roll of slide film and a roll of negative film to understand whether I need to over/under expose on the RZ, the Hassy, etc, then note my own compensation from there

 

[ghoonk]

As a general rule most meters are designed with center weight metering and even matrix metering tend to be more aimed towards the bottom slighty. Reason is landscapes since usually there is more sky in the images. So most OEMs have been following that standard for many years. Even matrix metering as much as you think it would even out more it still is mainly weighted towards center bottom. In a word it is not really accurate but it works out in general as the best compromise . To truly work within the zone system a spot meter is required. Where you can measure the whole zone system which I think is a 8 stop range of metering points. I may have that number wrong. Your testing my memory. LOL


The key here is a compromise on adjustments. Which photography as a whole is compromising one thing or another to fit your art.

The Zone System has 10 metering points - Zone 1 is black, Zone 10 is white, and Zone 5 is a medium-grey of sorts. Normal shadows are supposed to be Zone 4, while dark shadows with texture are supposed to be in Zone 2 to Zone 3.

But thanks for the insight on the matrix metering - thank goodness I don't use it on my Nikon any more. More a habit than anything - I pretty much know how things will turn out if I use average/center-weighted metering or spot metering

 

[Cindy Flood]

I have a Contax 645, Leica M6 and Leitz iiig. I use a Sekonic L-508 meter (with spot meter) even with the two cameras with built-in meters. As a general rule if I'm using black and white print film, I meter for the darkest area that I want detail in and place that in Zone III. Then I stop down 2 stops which puts middle grey in Zone V. There are always exceptions to this rule, so you have to know the dynamic range of the subject and range of the film.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

10 thanks what was I thinking. Told you where pushing my memory buttons. LOL

 

[Cindy Flood]

Actually 11 zones 0-X. :loco:

 

[ghoonk]

I have a Contax 645, Leica M6 and Leitz iiig. I use a Sekonic L-508 meter (with spot meter) even with the two cameras with built-in meters. As a general rule if I'm using black and white print film, I meter for the darkest area that I want detail in and place that in Zone III. Then I stop down 2 stops which puts middle grey in Zone V. There are always exceptions to this rule, so you have to know the dynamic range of the subject and range of the film.

Ah, here's where I gets interesting:

1. You're using a spot meter, which introduces a control against all the cameras. What I'm wondering is, would the meters on your Contax and M6 give you the same results for the same scene?

2. Since you're using a light meter, and you're parking the darkest area in Zone III, would this apply for slide, negative, or both (i.e. doesn't matter at all)?

3. Let's say you meter the darkest area, and your meter throws 1/60, f8 at ISO100 (Kodak E100 slide film). This becomes Zone III. You mentioned stopping down 2 stops, so that makes it 1/15, f8 at ISO100?

Assuming two situations:

Moderate dynamic range - say 4 stops between the brightest and the darkest areas. This should be easy to meter (I think) - if I were shooting on E100, I would look for a subject that sits in between the two ends of the Zones, and meter that, which should give me a decent result.

Extreme dynamic range - say 7 stops between the brightest and the darkest, e.g. a backlit tree (Zone 3) in the middle of a snowdrift (Zone 10). I'm guessing I should meter the tree (Zone 3), add 2-stops of EV (which puts it into Zone 5), or should I meter the snow (Zone 10) and drop 5 stops of EV?

Let's say I meter the snow - 1/500, f8, ISO100. This would mean the snow comes out as a Zone 5. At Zone 5, the tree is probably somewhere in Zone 0 (black). If I stop down 3 stops, I put the snow at Zone 8 (not blow-out white, still has texture), and my tree ends up in Zone 1 (black) - that won't work, so I'll try one more stop, which puts the snow into Zone 9 (almost blown-out, still has texture), and my tree into Zone 2 (dark shadow with texture).

Assuming I don't have access to a reflector, it just means that's about the best I can do to retain some detail between the tree and the snow, as opposed to being able to throw in some fill-light and reducing the variance in dynamic range.

Did I get it so far, or have I gone down the wrong path of thinking altogether?

 

[Thierry]

Again, for all who wish to have a basic understanding, before going more in depth with e.g. A. Adam's series of books (among them "The Negative"), here a clear and understandable link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_System

And yes, the entire zone system range is 11 points, from Zone "0" to Zone "10", respectively from pure black to pure white, zone 5 being a medium grey (18% reflecting, which most of the light-meters are taking as the reference)

Thierry

 

[ghoonk]

Actually 11 zones 0-X. :loco:

I don't know if i should curl up into a ball and start sobbing, or laugh hysterically in the corner of my office now.

 

[Cindy Flood]

:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
Actually, best to not take this too seriously. Print film has a lot of latitude. Sometimes I take my iiig (no meter) out and use sunny 16 and it is amazing how well it works.

 

[ghoonk]

Again, for all who wish to have a basic understanding, before going more in depth with e.g. A. Adam's series of books (among them "The Negative"), here a clear and understandable link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_System

And yes, the entire zone system range is 11 points, from Zone "0" to Zone "10", respectively from pure black to pure white, zone 5 being a medium grey (18% reflecting, which most of the light-meters are taking as the reference)

Thierry

oops. Right - 11 zones.

That was the article that did my head in. :shocked:

 

[ghoonk]

:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
Actually, best to not take this too seriously. Print film has a lot of latitude. Sometimes I take my iiig (no meter) out and use sunny 16 and it is amazing how well it works.

Yeah, kind of what I was wondering - just shoot first, ask questions later. The Dirty Harry Rule.

 

[Cindy Flood]

1. My Contax and my M6 have reflective meters. They average the light reflecting from the whole scene to Zone V or 18% grey. This may be or may not be what I calculate using a spot meter.

2. Slide film is like digital. You need to be concerned with your highlights so you have to know your dynamic range and figure to protect the highlights. If you take a spot of the brightest spot that you want detail in and the darkest spot that you want detail in, you can make that decision.

3. Yes, your meter is looking at that darkest spot that you measured and figuring it is 18% grey or Zone V. You need to stop down two stops to place that in Zone III.


Your extreme dynamic range example seems backward. You need to make the artistic decision when you have extreme range. You will have to sacrifice something. When you measure the brightest area that you want detail in, you need increase the exposure because your meter has looked at that brightest spot and said "18% grey". You don't want that spot 18% grey, you want it brighter.

Ah, here's where I gets interesting:

1. You're using a spot meter, which introduces a control against all the cameras. What I'm wondering is, would the meters on your Contax and M6 give you the same results for the same scene?

2. Since you're using a light meter, and you're parking the darkest area in Zone III, would this apply for slide, negative, or both (i.e. doesn't matter at all)?

3. Let's say you meter the darkest area, and your meter throws 1/60, f8 at ISO100 (Kodak E100 slide film). This becomes Zone III. You mentioned stopping down 2 stops, so that makes it 1/15, f8 at ISO100?


Assuming two situations:

Moderate dynamic range - say 4 stops between the brightest and the darkest areas. This should be easy to meter (I think) - if I were shooting on E100, I would look for a subject that sits in between the two ends of the Zones, and meter that, which should give me a decent result.

Extreme dynamic range - say 7 stops between the brightest and the darkest, e.g. a backlit tree (Zone 3) in the middle of a snowdrift (Zone 10). I'm guessing I should meter the tree (Zone 3), add 2-stops of EV (which puts it into Zone 5), or should I meter the snow (Zone 10) and drop 5 stops of EV?

Let's say I meter the snow - 1/500, f8, ISO100. This would mean the snow comes out as a Zone 5. At Zone 5, the tree is probably somewhere in Zone 0 (black). If I stop down 3 stops, I put the snow at Zone 8 (not blow-out white, still has texture), and my tree ends up in Zone 1 (black) - that won't work, so I'll try one more stop, which puts the snow into Zone 9 (almost blown-out, still has texture), and my tree into Zone 2 (dark shadow with texture).

Assuming I don't have access to a reflector, it just means that's about the best I can do to retain some detail between the tree and the snow, as opposed to being able to throw in some fill-light and reducing the variance in dynamic range.

Did I get it so far, or have I gone down the wrong path of thinking altogether?

 

[jlm]

with respect to metering, the in-camera meters are problematic as they evaluate various parts of the total scene with more or less influence. I liked my Blad TCC 205 because it was a spot meter, not usually found, but the blad prisms are center weighted. Averaging, center weighted, matrix, all are practically useless with a zone system approach, where the basic concept is to evaluate the amount of reflected light from specific parts of the image.
If you are serious about zone work, you need a spot meter to examine specific areas.
overall exposure is usually done by measuring off a middle gray part of the scene, for that you need to use experience to select the right area, OR, Picker's insight was to meter off of your hand (assuming you are caucasion, and your hand is in the same light as the subject, which should be in Zone VI, hence his workshop title, and then overrexpose one stop, so you are exposing as if you had measured zone V.

another approach is to use an incident meter at the same position as the subject which will set exposure for zone V as well.

 

[Cindy Flood]

I consulted with ghoonk about moving this thread to the Analog forum. I hope some of you here can give him some insight into the metering of his specific cameras (Hassleblad and Mamiya).

 

[wentbackward]

With regards to the original question, I think Ansel Adams called these differences, the K factor or something like that, where the meter was biased. If you have a grey card and direct sunlight. Just cover the metered area with the grey card (doesn't matter if it's close to the camera, but just ensure direct light is hitting the card) and set f16. The meter should measure the same as the ISO setting, if it is biased in favour of shadows, it will register a higher shutter speed to under expose slightly.

I've found the meter on the DF to be terrible, I imagine the AFD is similar. Basically when in so called matrix mode, it is generally about 1 stop underexposed, and fairly random. Setting it to centre weighted yields more consistent results and measuring off a grey card is fairly neutral, maybe 1/3rd under.