Light Meters

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by kencaleno

That book will put you wrong!-He is a great film photographer,but he doesn't know jack about digital.

... sounds eerily familiar... *glare*

[petergraemedavies]

I have purchased a Sekonic 758DR lightmeter (I thought i may as well buy a good one) and the instruction manual is so vague. All I want to know at this stage is "How to take a reading of Incident light and of reflected light with thisa light meter

[RichardTaylor]

@petergraemedavies
The basic principals are the same so this may help.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Gu...ght-meter-4748

[CaptainNH]

Originally Posted by osmosisstudios

... Sounds eerily familiar... *glare*

..............

[WooD]

Some people like them.....some don't.

I've got to where I pretty much know where to set my lights, but still love having a meter around. I bought a little Sekonic L-308s. I've been using it more with ambient light than flash here lately.

It's in your budget too.

Sekonic | L-308S Flashmate Light Meter | 401-309 | B&H Photo

[Cyndi Parks]

I know this is an old thread, but I am glad you asked the question. Here's more for all of you... 1) Rob did you wind up getting a light meter? or using the one in the camera? 2) Most of what I shoot is band kids on the move. Would a light meter do me any good anyway? 3) I was asked to take some shots for a press release and I did some shots with and without the flash. The field was lit with the high intensity lights that are fairly new so the color isn't all orange or yellow (yeah learned about WB real quick in some of these stadiums) and was pretty consistent. In some instances the picture the boy's face was somewhat obscured but if I really wanted to get a good shot of his face I had to crouch. They were wearing cavalier style hats with long bills. I got the camera home and the hubby (who had taken photography lessons using a Pentax about 25-30 years ago and rarely uses my camera) immediately jumped in and said I really need a light meter, the shots weren't bad but a light meter would have helped out a lot... You get the picture. So in all of this, here is my question, when doing those kind of shots (portrait type outdoor in a football stadium shots) would a separate light meter have helped me? I can post pictures if you like. I use a Canon Rebel XT with a Tamron 18-270 lens. Trying to shoot off auto for the most part. I did warn the person asking me to take the pictures that I wasn't a professional but that I would do the best I could. I really like the lens but in doing the research on it found out that it really doesn't do as well darker situations. I risk I was willing to take as I did get some good shots out of it closer in to the action.

Thanks for all your help in advance. Cyndi

[RichardTaylor]

Cyndi Parks
An external, incident light meter, would be better if you can place your self at the subjects location, measure the illumination falling on the subject and then return back to your shooting position to take the picture.

The through the lens light meters are very good. The clue is to know how to use them and the histogram.
I would not have shot auto as you have no control over what the camera is doing, and your ISO will max out at 400..

In conditions like that I would have shot in the "creative zone" at an ISO (up to the maximum) that would allow me to shoot at a shutter speed where camera motion would not have been a problem (and hopefully subject motion), and wide open if need be. I would also shoot RAW to give me more control over noise & exposure when PPing.

I would have set the camera to partial metering, zoomed in on the subject and taken a couple of test shots. Then I would check the histogram. I would have then dialed in some exposure compensation (if shooting AV or TV) if need be or allowed for any compensation if shooting manually.

Having a fast lens, like F2.8 or even better F2 or faster would help in low light situations.

I can post some examples from a recent indood classical music concert I shot.

[Cyndi Parks]

Thanks for the reply Richard!

Sorry this is getting out late. I do appreciate your response. The thing about it is I WAS shooting in a non auto mode. The flash just wasn't popping up and as a consequence the stadium lights were casting most of my light. At the time of evening I was shooting I had somewhat washed out but still usable sun light. The pictures turned out ok but they were better once I started using the flash. I guess my somewhat lengthy, yet trying to be brief, paragraph didn't convey what I wanted it to.

Even though I have had this camera 5 years now, please consider me a novice still. I have no idea how to use the histogram function in either my camera nor in Photoshop Elements. And have been trolling this site looking for and reading up on them. Same goes for RAW shooting. I know what it is I just don't have the skills to deal with RAW files, yet.

The pictures I took are actually posted on The Cavaliers web site under 15 June dress rehearsal. They are a drum and bugle corp group that was borrowing our stadium for a practice session. The site is The Cavaliers Drum & Bugle Corps if you would like to see them. Time was VERY limited as a big storm was blowing in and they wanted to get one last practice in before it hit. I didn't have the time to set things up as well as I could even with my limited abilities. I'll admit there are some REALLY crappy ones in the set.

I would LOVE to get a faster lens, however, with limited funds (most of which are going to support my son's music habit ) I was going for versatility in my lens collection. Even the consumer level lenses are almost out of my range. This is why we are getting back to the question of JUST using the light meter in the camera and getting a better flash or spending the cash on an external meter and STILL needing a better flash. At this point I think just the flash is the better option for my circumstances.

ALL of you if you go to the Cavaliers home page and look at the pictures, critiques are welcome!

Thanks again for your input! I will be doing A LOT of reading up and playing with the camera using your suggestions as much as I can!

[RichardTaylor]

Hi Cyndi.
Just had a quick look at a couple of them.

The ones where the subjects are still (24754 for example) are fair considering the conditions and your camera/lens.
Just curious, were you using a tripod for these shots?

The subject marching ones.(24748) suffer from camera movement.
I can't hand hold a 270mm lens @ 1/25 second

I would try shooting at ISO 800 (or even 1600) with the aperture wide open) and take what ever shutter speed I can get - faster is better (up to a point).

Using a mono pod may help with stability and is a relatively low cost solution.

See how that goes and if it doesn't work out then consider an external flash (although I am not sure that is the solution - without runing some tests out door tests. I may try that in the next day or two tonight and I will keep you posted).
The last thing I would buy (and I do own one) is an external light meter.
Richard

[Cyndi Parks]

Richard,

I was using a mono pod as much as possible in the stands and on the field. As the weather moved in and the lighting got worse I caved and switched back to Auto so the flash would kick in, I did remember to set the ISO to 1600 for the on the field marching shots. I think part of it is inherent with the lens, that it isn't rated as good in the low light settings. Not to blame it ALL on the lens because it is only as good as the person holding it! It was a gamble I was willing to take as I don't shoot in low lighting all the time. Being able to shoot with a faster ISO for the low light/ night times would be good as well but that would mean getting a newer camera. I do get some cool shots with only having up to 1600 ISO available, though!


Thank you for looking at the pictures. I just want to try to improve with what I have, I really need to play with it more than what I do, I guess that is the real trick to taking better photos.

Cyndi