ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- You can (and should) also read my blog post about this: aows.co/blog/6...
---
Website: aows.co
Blog: aows.co/blog
“Went West”, my first book: aows.co/store/...
---
Instagram: / aows
Twitter: / aows
Facebook: / aowsphotos
Medium: / aows
-----
GEAR I USE
-----
Film Photography
Bronica MF Camera - ebay.to/2hbnHYo
50mm f/3.5 - ebay.to/2he6QRi
150mm f/4 - ebay.to/2x99l1i
250mm f/5.6 - ebay.to/2wqkrPP
Tripod - amzn.to/2jEg3a0
Mechanical Shutter Release - amzn.to/2xtn9U2
Lee Filters Holder - amzn.to/2heE3vF
10-stop ND filter - amzn.to/2f4C64c
15-stop ND filter - amzn.to/2xhtMZ9
Holga MF "Toy" Camera - amzn.to/2wC8Xni
Scanner - amzn.to/2wqqyU3
Videos, a combination of:
Sony a6500 - amzn.to/2hdiQm1
16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 - amzn.to/2xa5pxe
21mm f/1.4 - amzn.to/2feWJOW
55-210mm f/4.5-6.3 - amzn.to/2wCturZ
Memory card for 4k - amzn.to/2hejBLt
Cage - amzn.to/2fwvcWh
Microphone - amzn.to/2xhjSq4
Tripod - amzn.to/2xhv4mV
Mavic Pro - amzn.to/2xt2rDD
RX100ii - amzn.to/2y9Xltd
Misc
Backpack - amzn.to/2jET5zf
---
Vlogging about photography (mostly landscape) and all kind of camera gear, digital and analog.
I came to the same realization earlier. I have a 5Dmk2, which creates beautiful images, and what I realized was that I didn’t actually need mirrorless capabilities of the R5, but I still wanted a mirrorless camera to simulate my shots. Mirrorless thus acts as a Polaroid test camera and I can use it as an advanced light meter specifically to simulate exposure compensation.
Thanks for demonstrating it in action. :)
Man you stimulate and motivate everyone who watches your videos. And you also tell no unseen, you know what you are talking about. Really I get more and more respect for your friend. Thank you, really thanks for another great video.
Thank you so much for watching!
Great video, French guy! I have been combing the internet for this information. Eying up that exact Minolta spot meter. But I have this tiny Sony RX100 V, and I knew it could do the job. I am quite surprised though there isn't more of a difference in settings between the two cameras due to your sensor being APSC and your film being 120. I suppose only testing for myself will show me that it's fine, even with the 1 inch sensor on my RX100. Thanks for being cool!
Thanks, James! The camera doesn't really matter, the settings will always be the same to get the same exposure ("brightness"). You can use a smartphone to meter for a large format camera, for example. The differences in sensor / film size are more about resolution, depth of field, and noise. The bigger the sensor, the more pixels / chemicals you can fit on it, blurrier backgrounds, and clearer and sharper images. But the shutter speed, aperture and ISO values are constant across the whole spectrum. Just keep in mind that manufacturers (both digital and film) don't always set their ISO values right, so some testing is required to get the proper equivalence. For example, your ISO 125 (or whatever) on your digital camera might correspond to your film's 100 ASA value. Point your digital camera at something, get the settings, dial them in on your film camera, and then change the shutter speed by 1 and 2 stops, under and overexposing the images. A total of 5 frames should be enough. Write down the settings used and you'll easily find the right values.
Thank you 🙏 I will use this method. I have my Mirrorless with me when I shoot film anyway 😎
Nice. I actually just tried this last weekend. I shoot Acros and I have a Fuji X100F. I brought my Hasselblad, Leica M6, my X100F, and my Sekonic to shoot four scenes bracketed at +-1 stop. I had more shots with my Leica so I tried a bunch other things as well. Unfortunately I’ve not developed any of the rolls yet to check the results.
Let me know if it worked for you! Btw how is the x100? My wife has the t model and it's so fun to shoot!
Also interested in your results, especially for the Fuji, since it rumors that Fuji rates their ISO a little bit differently.
Hello adri thanks for sharing all your findings. Im really liking the Bronica!!
Thank you, Steve, for watching! I'm glad you like your new camera, it's a beautiful one for sure!
Thanks for this. Do you use spot metering on the mirrorless?
Does the focal length need to be the same on the digital camera as on the film camera?
I bought a yashica tlr 6x6 and thought about using my Fujifilm x100s as my lightmeter?
Would that work, what do you think?
Thanks for the video! Just Google the ide and found this! Awesome!
Best regards
Alfons
Very interesting! So the coloured filters would show what the difference would look like in the digital preview?
For example, red filters make skies look dark so if you were to put your digital to BnW mode and out the red filter on, would the sky look dark?
That's right, James. Just keep in mind that the digital sensor does not behave exactly the same way and the filter will have a greater effect with film. But it's very useful as a reference :)
Thanks a lot for this. I was planning on getting a spot light meter, but i think you just saved me the trouble. I'll test it with E-6 and see what happens!
Totally! It should work just fine, whether you prefer a dedicated meter or use a digital camera... that's a different story :)
You don't truly and understand spot meter sir this video is a general idea of snap shot some what correct exposure . Sports meter is placing the value on your subject knowing you have control on its detail representation in output or print
That is amazing! Never saw that before 🙌🙌🙌
Thanks!
Another very helpful video.
Glad to know it was useful 👍
Commentary works for HP5 and perhaps most b/w and color neg C41 film - less so for slide E6 film. Digital sensor screen and film emulsion latitudes vary though, spot metering can also be important.
Yes, this was about my experience shooting this specific Bronica and HP5 (although I do the same when shooting other Ilford films like FP4, Delta and Pan F). It might not be as accurate as using a dedicated light meter but it takes your exposure very close to where it should be. And anyway, this is if you happen to have a digital camera with you (I do to make these videos), if you carry just your film camera then this doesn't work :)
In order to set exposure properly on the digital camera, I just half the ISO from the film stock. If i was shooting on ISO 400 Film Stock, that i need to ISO of the digital to 200 in order to get an accurate image. Does that make sense?
It does :)
Do you do this in all cases?
Hi just wondered why your not using your light meter in the medium format camera. Are they terrible. I am just starting out in Film photography and have just purchased a Mamiya 645 and was thinking of using the in built meter. but maybe this isn't going to get me the results. Any thoughts much appreciated. Thanks
Hey, Julian. Well my Bronica doesn't have a light meter so I need an external one :) The one in your Mamiya should be more than enough!
Which settings on the dtgitall, Matrix or Average?
I always use matrix, but it doesn't matter that much. Check the live preview and the histogram and make sure they look ok. Some metering modes are better than others for different situations, as long as you know how they work, you are good :)
Gracias por el aporte.Me he dedicado estos días a analizar las diferencias de pasos exposición entre los filtros de color para llevarlos a la TLR ,usando la cámara digital.Me refiero ,no a la medición que me dé la cámara ,sino al hecho de que diferencia ahí de pasos entre poner o no poner determinado filtro en el objetivo y llevarlo a la TLR .Aunque yo veo que a tí te funciona con la sony ,tengo entendido que los isos que señalan ciertas marcas fotográficas ,creo que nikon se lleva el premio,no estoy seguro,....no son correspondidas a un ASA analógico,un 400 ASA puede llegar a ser un 320 iso en ciertos modelos de cámara.No sé hasta que límite pueda el film compensar.Otra prueba que hice fue poner los filtros delante de un lightmeter Sekonic antiguo para ver la diferencia de medición,y algo incómodo ya es ,pero bastante preciso.Esos lightmeter tienen tamaño pero no pesan nada..........En cuanto a medir a sombras o luces y cuanto contraste o detalle haya entre ambos dependerá de que película también?.......................................................................................................................................................................................................hanks Thank you for the contribution. I have spent these days analyzing the differences of exposure steps between the color filters to take them to the TLR, using the digital camera. I mean, not to the medition that the camera gives me, but to the fact of what difference there is between putting or not putting a certain filter on the lens and taking it to the TLR. Although I see that it works for you with sony, I understand that the isos thatsign on to certain cameras, I think nikon takes the award, I'm not sure, .... are not matched to an analog ASA, a 400 ASA can be a 320 iso in certain camera models. I do not know until what limit the film can compensate. Another test I did was to put the filters in front of an old Sekonic lightmeter to see the difference in medition, and something uncomfortable is already, but quite accurate. Those lightmeter have size but do not weigh anything ......
In terms of measuring shadows or lights and how much contrast or detail there is between both will depend on what film we are using too ,no?
Por supuesto, esto va a depender y mucho de la camara y la pelicula que uses. La diferencia entre ASA indicado y el real que mencionas ocurre en casi todas las marcas, y ocurre asi mismo en pelicula. Creo que HP5 es en realidad 320 tambien. Por eso digo que lo mejor es simplemente sacar unas 3-4 imagenes con distintos ajustes y mirar cual es mejor en tu caso camara digital / pelicula. Solo necesitas saber la diferencia con la medicion que te da para a partir de ahi poder usarla con confianza :)
Y lo comento como "metodo de andar por casa". Un lightmeter como el Sekonic te va a dar mejor resultado si sabes usarlo, y puedes usar el Zone System. En mi experiencia la medicion que me da la camara digital es mas que suficiente para lo que hago, pero como siempre cada uno va a tener diferentes necesidades.
Hace unos años fotografos analogicos (incluyendo Ansel Adams) usaban camaras Polaroid ademas de sus lightmeter para previsualizar una imagen en blanco y negro, y la exposicion (que tambien era aproximada). Esto es algo parecido, no es perfecto pero ayuda :)
i do the same, but you said you dont want to use your phone when shooting film but you use your digital camera instead, i dont get it ^^ :)
Oh!!! What is necessary!!!
I appreciate that you can use the digital camera to approximate your film exposure, but you can use the "Sunny 16" rule and haul nothing extra around. If you are just shooting film, then the digital camera as a meter is more size, weight and less accurate than almost any meter. Finally, the dynamic ranges of a digital sensor and HP-5 are going to be quite different, so using the camera to set under and over exposure on film for a given digital effect is unlikely to work reliably. Exposure adjustment to filters - same issue. The digital camera is good to learn the image effects of exposure adjustment, filters and such, but once you learn, IMO move on to a real meter for predictable accuracy.
Thanks for your comment, Randall! And I agree: there's nothing like a real meter for accuracy.
The digital camera "trick" is, as you said, an approximation. But I've found it to be a pretty good starting point (much better than the sunny 16 rule) and after doing it for a while (with the same camera and film) you can learn how to correct for some scenarios like the one I mentioned at the end of the video.
Also, many people bring not only their film camera but also a digital one along with them. In my case, it's to film this videos, and also to have a digital version I can later share with friends or family, or "convert" to color in case I want it that way. So many might not be carrying something extra :)
The way your digital camera renders the whites and the blacks will not be the same as your film, but it certainly gives you an idea of what a photo will look like. This is something that a regular meter can't do. Experience will make you better at this, but there will be cases where you could really use it: I think it was Ansel Adams who suggested using a "viewing filter" to try to visualize the scene in black and white. This works even better!
Exposing for the shadows with digital,goes against the tried and proven rule ''expose for highlights ''without clipping''... the reason being that more information is available to the right of the histogram.
Hey, Christopher! I probably didn’t explain myself well, I think I meant “expose for the shadows when you are metering for film”. As a rule of thumb you want to protect the highlights when shooting digital.
It's call guessing after camera do the work in metering but a Gossen or a Minolta place your intentions into zone a show me correct exposure the we talk about exposure. Today's generation talk about EV without owning a light meter I don't see the logic or the math
What you are doing is use your digital as a Polaroid and guessing