I love cameras without light meters
Light meters are overrated. In photography, I like to make my own decisions, whether it comes to composition, exposure or anything else, which is why I still love simple old school cameras, that may not even feature a light meter. On the other hand, I sort of like the convenience of having a meter. It after all makes it very easy to expose the photo correctly. Or does it?
Using the force
Choosing between cameras is something that I go back and forth all the time, but always end up leaning towards the lesser featured cameras. Why could that be? The simple answer is that I just get better results with them. The second reason has much to do with the satisfaction of an instinctual method and intellectual self-reliance. It is like using the force. In other words, using your own senses, intuition and knowhow. Being rusty with the skill of course makes every photo fail, but that very much just motivates to acquire and maintain the skill in the first place. Practice makes perfect or good enough at least.
Variations of classic exposure rules are excellent alternatives for light meters
Over the years, I’ve memorised few different exposure rules that usually gets me pretty far. They are variations of the sunny 16 rule and the “f/8 and be there” mentality.
Sunny 16 rule is of course the tried and true daylight exposure rule, but you surely know all about it already. It is an age old rule and even though it basically doesn’t cover anything else than the very basic daylight conditions, it can be extended and varied to cover much more. Very versatile.
F8 and be there, on the other hand, is an expression popularised by Weegee that emphasizes “the importance of taking the opportunity for a picture rather than being too concerned about using the best technique.” It also happens to be a very good day light exposure sure if you think about it. If you go by the sunny 16 rule, you’d typically set the aperture to f11 or f16 for a completely sunlight scene. More often than not, there is at least some amount of shadows in the scene that typically requires you to open up the aperture maybe a stop or two, landing you to around f8 or so. Entering a completely shadowy area or encountering an overcast moment, is then only a matter of moving the aperture ring with the tip of the finger to a stop or two brighter f-number. Shooting at f8 in a f16 condition may very well land into the range of the film’s exposure latitude, so there’s usually not too much worry of critical over-exposure. Besides, it is always better to err on the side over-exposure anyways (when shooting negative film, I should add), which also supports this idea. So far I’ve hardly never accidentally over-exposed an image with this approach.
Pre-setting exposure enables faster reaction times and allows you to focus on the scene
In good daylight conditions, classic exposure rules such as these never fail and once becoming second nature, will save from a lot of hassle, enabling much faster reaction times and better success rate. When walking around, I visualise the exposure in my mind and pre-set the exposure. When the moment arrives, I’ve already made all the ground work and all there is to do, is to focus, compose and shoot. Not having to do the metering in the viewfinder, at this point, will free up much time and reduce the overall reaction time, because there’s less stuff to worry about. I’m also a big advocate of the idea that looking through the viewfinder should be a dedicated act for composing and paying attention to the scene in front of you. It is much harder to do that if you’re also trying to pay attention to the meter display at the same time. Pre-setting the exposure on the other hand allows it.
Comparing the shooting experiences between different kinds of cameras
I got the inspiration to write about this topic after comparing the shooting experiences of my Nikon FM2n and Leica M4. Nikon has a light meter, but the Leica doesn’t. I’ve been also shooting with Canon EOS Elan 7n a bit, which is a fully automated camera with very modern functions. You’d think that shooting with something like the EOS camera would make everything really easy, but I mess up a lot of photos with it. Sure, when the light is flat and conditions are easy, it does a great job, but dear god, add any kind of backlight scenario to the mix, and the camera gets confused really easily and introduces a whole new of workflow of compensation, exposure locking, spot metering etc. In situations like these, I have a hard time of jumping from the auto exposure mind-set to using the force. I have the tendency to just let the camera do the judgement. I get to the spray and pray mentality way too easily. Doing something automatically doesn’t mean doing it right. Moreover, the camera simply cannot know know how you’re planning to expose the image. The exposure will be based on whatever is programmed into it. It doesn’t know your vision or interpretation of the scene.
Same with my Nikon FM2. It doesn’t have exposure automation, but a light meter none the less. I tend to trust whatever the meter is saying to me and rolling with it. It takes a serious effort to question the meter reading once I’ve decided that it probably knows what it is doing. I actually think it would be a better camera if I’d just take the battery out.
The M4 doesn’t have a meter or automation. When there’s no one around to tell you what to do, you’re forced to put some brain cells to work. If the metering calculations turn out to be completely off, at least you know it’s your own fault and there’s no need to get mad at the camera, rendering the situation into a good learning experience.
Whenever I pick up a camera with a light meter or an automatic exposure mode, I outsource the decision making process and end up placing too much trust on technology. When it works, it’s great of course, but what eventually ends up happening, is that you’re not doing the thinking yourself. When the camera does the work, you mentally let go of the responsibility, because you don’t have to do the work yourself. The margin of error therefore rises, even though I should do just the opposite. There might be a bright light source in the background that you forget to compensate for, because you’re not in the right mindset for paying enough attention to the entire scene and evaluating. Having no light meter at hand, there’s no other option than trying your best to make the most educated guess you possibly can. It of course requires you to acquire the skill in the first place. It is a much harder route, but I personally really enjoy the fulfilment that it brings.
Handheld meter as a backup
I really haven’t mastered all the lighting conditions yet. Various daylight conditions are surely enough surprisingly easy to learn, but I sometimes still struggle with heavy overcast conditions and I typically end up accidentally under-exposing. For situations like these, I usually carry a very simple handheld light meter (a very inexpensive Gossen Sixtino) for an emergency back-up. If the lighting conditions are so bizarre that I simply cannot make an estimation of the exposure settings, it is a very handy tool to make sure I’m at least in the right ballpark. A handheld meter still allows me to leave out the viewfinder metering out of the equation.
Gossen Sixtino doesn’t have a viewfinder. You can only point it to a very general direction that prevents you from being too fussy with it. I use it to give me a bit of a confirmation for my own initial estimation.
Maybe some day, with some more practice, I’ll be able to cover harder lighting situations as well.
