Sony A7 as light meter? (long story)

[Dazzer123]

Hi folks,

 

This is going to be a weird one, so buckle up!

 

I just started with analog photography with the purchase of a Nikon F2.

 

For my first roll, i only used the Nikon's light meter and chose challenging, high-contrast subjects. The results were quite hit and miss. Many came out completely wrong.

 

For my second roll that i shot, i borrowed an expensive light meter from my brother-in-law (Sekonic l-858d). I also took my trusty first gen Sony A7 with me, fitted with a Fotodiox adapter (Nikon to Sony E-mount).

 

After a few shots i quickly gave up on the Sekonic. Because although i had read up on the Ansel Adams zone system, having to constantly think about how many stops this and that was just giving me a headache and taking all the fun out of it.

 

By contrast, using the Sony as my meter was much more enjoyable. I put it in manual mode, dialed in the settings until what i saw in the EVF was roughly what i wanted, then transferred the same settings over to the Nikon. So just to be clear, i was constantly swapping the same lens between the Sony and the Nikon.

 

And guess what?! Practically all my shots (metered using only the Sony) on the Nikon came out nice (i developed and scanned them myself)! And again, i had purposely chosen challenging shots where the Nikon's simple meter struggled to tell the whole story.

 

So this whole rather long-winded story leaves me with two burning questions:

 

Firstly: why would anyone bother with a standalone light meter when you can just use a mirrorless digital camera to monitor your shot beforehand? (presuming there are no practical reasons like extra weight etc).

 

And secondly: in my experiment i was constantly swapping the same 35mm lens between the two cameras.

 

But what if i had a totally different lens on my Sony? I guess it would depend if i was doing area or spot metering. But if i was to get a cheap zoom lens for the Sony that can zoom to any focal length, then i'm good to go, right? (i tend to work at high apertures most of the time and don't like very shallow DOF shots).

 

I'm asking because I'm about to take delivery of a Mamiya RB67 Pro SD and i don't want to be swapping out lenses all the time.

 

If you managed to get through this whole ramble, give yourself a pat on the back and im curious to know anyone's thoughts!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited May 26, 2023 by Dazzer123

[XKAES]

The Nikon and the Sony should give meter readings that are VERY similar -- assuming they are using the same lens and reading the same subject.

That assumes that both are working correctly and in the same MODE -- averaging.

You are correct about the Ansel Adams approach.  It takes a lot of time and patience, although it works if you know how to use it.

If you want good exposures, you can stick with a meter in the camera or you can get a hand-held meter.  For many the extra piece of gear is too much -- when the camera has a meter built-in.

I'd suggest you get a book on metering -- it's more involved than you think but is not difficult, AND well worth it.

To do a first test of your Nikon and Sony, take a meter reading of a white wall with the same lens wide open.  Are the shutter speeds the same or not?  If not, you've got a problem.

Edited May 26, 2023 by XKAES

[tadwil]

The practical reasons that you mention is THE reason why no one would use another camera and lens as a light meter -- at least I would not.  Get an older spot meter and learn how to use it, that will give you an accurate metering results and you won't need to cart around another camera and lens along with your already heavy Mamiya RB67 and lens(es).