I've got an old Lunasix F, which works fairly well. I just compared its readings with a new little Sekonic Twinmate. The Sekonic usually reads about 1/3 or 1/2 stop higher. They are so close, that I don't know how to decide which one is really spot on. Digital images taken with both reading look perfect. Histogram could help. But digital cameras are not usually ISO precise. Analog images are great too, as expected, but developing adds some little unavoidable offsets in density, so I cannot use them to determine which reading is "the good one". Checking the light readings against an old EOS 500 (only reflected mode, of course), it matches those of the old Lunasix F. I thought that a new meter should always work better than an old one. Is it feasible that the new Sekonic is not as precise as the old Lunasix F? or is it most likely that the old meter needs some recalibration?