Thanks all for your suggestions, ideas, etc! It's great to hear, though I don't know if I'm closer to reach a decision or not

I guess a topic like this can have two aspects: one, kind words of advice to one member (me) and two, an aspect of more general utility.

With that said, I wanted to clarify my own personal position a little bit more.

I shoot both digital and film. For digital, I have a 5Dmk2, which I will most likely upgrade to a mk3 (or 6D) probably next year (read: I'm not ditching digital). My "having fun cam" is the newly acquired NEX-6, which replaced my Lumix GF-1 as "it can adapt pretty much any lens that's in existence, and can do a lot of tilt/shift with it, too!" camera. The NEX may or may not accompany me. It is rare that my 5Dmk2 is not thrown in the bag, though, since one of the things I like to do is long exposure photography, and no amount of metering is going to give me good estimates on exposure when it comes to 5 - 10 minute exposures. So I will almost always shoot LE with my 5D before I move onto my film cameras.

For film, I shoot medium format and large format. 903SWC is my go-to MF for landscape, and for portraits, etc., I have my 67II, 203FE, Norita 66, and SL66E. All have a meters (though not spot in most of them). For LF, I shoot a lot of 4x5 with my Speed Graphic and Aero Ektar for portraits, and a SA 75/5.6 for landscape. I'm going to be expanding a lot on the lenses (Nikkor SW90, Symmar 180, and maybe something wider, like a 58XL) and I'm looking to get a proper field cam, currently salivating over the Chamonix 45-2. I did recently acquire a B&J 8x10 monorail, but I won't be jumping into that pond head-on for a while.

Getting back on topic: Size/weight of a handheld over a DSLR is a non-issue, as I will always travel with a digital on me. And no, it's not *just* as an expensive & heavy lightmeter; about 50% of what I do is still digital. Incidence metering, I guess, is something I've never done, and don't quite yet understand the utility of. Yes, the Minolta has a cone. I'm wondering, if I'm to get more into shooting portraits (models, nudes, etc.) incidence could come in handy and/or indispensable (this is the kind of question I want to ask most)?

I'm also interested in speed, accuracy, etc. For example, say I really wanted to travel light. I decide to just take my Moskva-5, without a digital camera. But I'll always have my iPhone 5 on me with the Pocket Light Meter app. So the question here would be, if the point is to travel light, is there an insurmounatble advantage in me, say, bridging along the Minolta meter (adding to the bulk) than just saying "heck if I'm going light, why not just use the iPhone app?".

One more thing to clarify: I'm fairly new to this game. I got serious about photography 4 years ago, and serious about film photography about 3 years ago. So I haven't "ditched" light meters: I've never had the chance to use them in the first place, having come in from the digital side of things and getting into film afterwards. So what I'm wondering about is whether or not there are huge advantages to using them that I just don't know about!

Anyway, sorry about the rambling, but I didn't want to pose the question and appear uninterested in the conversation, because I am!! Thanks!