All any meter ever does is provide a suggestion, when the meter is built in to the camera we do though tend to default to the camera's suggestion.
Similarly most people tend to take an incident meters suggestion as gospel. An incident meter though simply gives you an objective reference point that will place say skin tones as if they were normally and fully lit. One should ask though if that is really what you want?
Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR
"We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin
Is one correct in assuming the kitchen table is in the kitchen? If so how large is the room whether it is the kitchen or not. What color are the walls, ceiling, and floor? What color/tone was the table? What type of lighting was used? These all affect meter readings.
I used my Pentax digital camera as a meter and decided on an exposure (8 sec @ f16) to set on my Crown.
What camera model? What lens? What metering mode? All affect the meter reading.
So then I decided to meter the same scene with my Sekonic L-358 just to see if it agreed with the digital camera...It did not. It was telling me 4 sec @ f16, which is half the exposure time.
The Sekonic has a 54° angle of view in reflective mode which is wide for a hand held meter.
The difference between a 4 second exposure and a 8 second exposure is 1 stop.
Was the meter to subject distance the same for both meters?
Was the same point in the scene used as the metering center?
The only way you can compare a SLR meter with a handheld meter and get a meaningful comparison is to use a fixed focal length, non telephoto lens on the SLR, point the two at the same subject, from the same position. The subject, if a evenly lit monotone that fills the camera frame and hand held meter angle of view should read the same on both regardless of metering mode the SLR is in. If the subject is not a monotone that fills the camera and hand held meter's angle of view then the hand held has to be positioned so that its sensor is centered on the same point the camera's reading is taken from.
A 1 stop difference between a hand held and SLR meter in a real world setting is not that great.
Search engine=google; search term= metering technique; results= https://www.google.com/search?q=mete...x-a&channel=sb
Reading the first 6 to 10 links should give you a good starting understanding of metering but these are pointers. All the pointers in existence will not guarantee you great results with any meter. They will guide you to learn to meter well with the ones you have and give you a good idea of how to establish a good technique with a unknown meter.
Last edited by shutterfinger; 05-21-2014 at 12:57 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I have a 358. To get reflected light measurements you need to use the flat attachment instead of the bulb (which is for incident). So which one did you use?
If you used the flat one (relfected), do you have a scope? If you don't have a scope I don't see how you can get any meaningful measurement as you really have no idea where the attachment is pointing and a small change in what it sees. Also, when taking relfective measurements with the Sekonic then you are spot metering. If you spot meter you really need to know what you are metering and how to compensate for a correct exposure, if you are not using a grey card.
Finally, you meter differently when using incident (walk up to subject, take a reading facing camera) or spot (stand by camera, aim at a midtone on the subject and meter that).
So, describe how you metered and we can see what the issue was.
Don't know about your exact scene it's difficult to say. It's possible that both are accurate. Perhaps the camera was on some source of evaluative/matrix metering system which give good exposure in a lighting condition where a straight reading from a 54 degree reflected light meter won't.
The datasheet for Fuji fp 100c instant film calls for a 1 stop exposure increase when shooting at 4 sec, so your meter was correct. A metered 4 sec exposure would be an 8 sec exposure with reciprocity correction.