I understand what 2F/2F is saying, but don't quite agree.
Originally Posted by 2F/2F
The Digisix/flash are slower to setup when you change films, but once you have done so, they are quick and easy to use. In my mind, the time I save because of their incredible portability pretty well offsets their slowness of setup.
I think they are quite robust, and that their tiny size contributes to that. I am quite sure that the combination of their versatility and their tiny size is what causes them to be as expensive as they are - if they were bigger, they would be cheaper.
In my case, I'm happy to switch back and forth between my Profisix and my Digiflash, and to appreciate both of them for their strengths.
As to whether it is a good idea to spend the extra for the Digiflash vs. the Digisix, it seemed to me that when I made my choice I was acquiring the meter because of it's compactness, so it didn't make sense to have to bring two meters at any time when compactness and flash metering both mattered.
By the way as I recall it, when I bought my Profisix new in the 1980s, it cost me more than the Digiflash I bought recently. If you include the cost of the Profisix flash metering accessory I bought shortly after I bought the Profisix meter, the two together cost much more than the Digiflash.
Just picked up a "looks bad, works good" Minolta Auto Meter IV on *bay for ~$130 shipped. Does everything, and known for being quite tough. Be patient, and keep looking. You'll find something eventually.
Archer in Boulder
what is the advantage of the analog light meter,like Sekonic L-398 Studio Deluxe over the digital light meter like Sekonic L-308S,both having almost the same price list?will the analog give the accurate reading just like the digital one?
by the way,anybody have an experience with the:-
2)Minolta IV F
i'm interested with both of the meter above,but not sure which one will fit my needs,all comments are welcome.
i love taking urban landscape and street photo during night,and the lighting is quite tricky for me to get the correct exposure.
hope this info. will help in deciding which one is suitable for me because this will be my first light meter.
thanks again for all the replies
I'm another who's gone the Digiflash route. I don't find it all that much slower to set up ISO than my older L-328 Sekonic. I bought it for the convenient size & weight. It also has exposure compensation, timer, clock, etc.
Regarding the L-398, it's a Selenium cell meter and less sensitive than the newer meters but has been made for many years & is a good meter.
I would be inclined to go with a newer meter for the increased sensitivity and would like the ability to read flash.