Help on the Mamiya rz67 pro ii

[Derrel]

HERE is a good page to learn how to judge/evaluate/set the right exposure. This Fred Picker method of determining exposure has become a sort of well-known, standard system.

Ultimate Exposure Computer

Years ago,like 35 years ago, a fellow developed a circular slide-rule type calculator that showed all kinds of exposure settings, based on the "X" value system where each "X was one f/stop or one shutter speed....beginning with Sunny 16, he had + and - scenarios dialed in. For example, earlier I told you open shade was PLUS 4 stops.

I seem to vaguely recall that Moonlight was + 24 "X".

His calculator was expensive....like $24.95, back when that would buy you about 40 gallons of gasoline. The system was written up in Popular Photography or Modern Photography magazine, one of those two.

 

[psreilly]

I don't know if any of you are familiar with Vincent Peters work, but that really catches my eye. His use of natural light is very impressive. He hardly uses HMI or studio lighting. I wish I could post some pics here to have you guys kind of estimate what his exposure was on certain shots. Anyway, very rarely does he have full body length shots. So I think he keeps his f/stop pretty low for the most part and his shutter delayed to bring out the light. If any of you do know his work though curious to what you think of his style

 

[psreilly]

Shot at f/8 today with 400 ISO and slowed the shutter down a bit to 1/250th.. Too much exposure? I feel like they'll be okay I was looking for a little over exposure.. Weather was bright sunny

 

[Derrel]

On B&W film, you ought to be okay, although most likely there will be over-exposure of around 2 f/stops or a bit more, depending. There are a number of variables: if you were exposing for the shadows, you'd probably be spot-on, and you could develop the film minus 20% and have lovely negatives.

 

[psreilly]

Awesome man! I'll be sure to post some pics i'd like to get some feedback on what I could do to improve

 

[cgw]

Unless your film and processing are free, just get an incident light meter and stop guessing.

 

[psreilly]

I prefer not to use a light meter in most cases, but if I ever do need one I just get a reading with my DSLR. Why not get a reading and a preview of what you'll be getting

 

[Mike_E]

I prefer not to use a light meter in most cases, but if I ever do need one I just get a reading with my DSLR. Why not get a reading and a preview of what you'll be getting

Do you take porters along? That's a lot to carry. A small Sekonic is about the size of a couple of filters.

 

[psreilly]

Yeah it can get a little heavy. But to be honest I don't use light meters cause there's really no such thing as perfect light. I hear the term thrown around so often and there's just so many different factors that come into a photograph. Sometimes I like a bit of under-exposure and other times I like a little over. So a light meter while it will give me its idea of "correct" light, i'd rather just go with my own eyes. I don't know call me stubborn maybe haha

 

[cgw]

Yeah it can get a little heavy. But to be honest I don't use light meters cause there's really no such thing as perfect light. I hear the term thrown around so often and there's just so many different factors that come into a photograph. Sometimes I like a bit of under-exposure and other times I like a little over. So a light meter while it will give me its idea of "correct" light, i'd rather just go with my own eyes. I don't know call me stubborn maybe haha

Maybe ill-advised? An incident meter will be closer to "right" than your DSLR's reflected meter in a surprising number of cases. You've no consistent way of judging +/- exposure without an accurate baseline reading. But as I said, it's your film and processing $$$.

 

[psreilly]

Yeah but I hardly ever go for the "right" lighting. My stuff always comes out either a bit over or under exposed, and for me that's just the way I like it. There's plenty of people who don't use a light meter, it's not like you need to have it to produce anything from a decent to great photograph

 

[Mike_E]

Yeah but I hardly ever go for the "right" lighting. My stuff always comes out either a bit over or under exposed, and for me that's just the way I like it. There's plenty of people who don't use a light meter, it's not like you need to have it to produce anything from a decent to great photograph

You are right, of course.

I like having one, I actually like having a spot meter more but either one will work. The thing is that I like the ability to be consistent with what I'm doing. Having a base line to be able to under or over expose and get what I want consistently and not worry whether or not I'll get what I wanted. Too often I won't be back that way so I don't get a second or third chance at it. It's just easier for me to carry a meter.

To each his own.

 

[psreilly]

I've spent alot recently on the Mamiya with the lenses, and I also purchased the grip for it cause I don't trust myself from dropping it. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have a decent light meter or spot meter, but I can't see paying 500 bucks or more for one since i'm not a professional. I've tried looking for Sekonics in the range of 100-300 but not much out there

 

[Mike_E]

Ebay is your friend here.

Even an older one with the selenium cell (it gets hit or miss the older you go with these) is helpful.

An old Gossen Luna Pro is a great meter too.

Gossen Luna Pro Light Meter w Case | eBay

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=p2047675.m570.l1313&_nkw=Gossen+Luna+Pro&_sacat=0&_from=R40

 

[cgw]

Quite a few Sekonic incident meters for not a lot of $$$. Check out the 318, 328 and newer 308(my fave for its feature/price quotient). The older 508 does spot+incident+flash metering and seems to be getting cheaper. The "new" old school Sekonic L-398m is also worth a look--plentiful and usually very affordable. I'd get the newest meter you can afford. Seriously, you'll get more enjoyment from those big negs and transparencies if most are properly exposed. That's all we're trying to say here.