Ensign MF 1620 Selfix

[snowqueen]

Thanks guys, its going to take me a while before im comfortable doing that, i did shoot a couple with guess work and i think there the ones that are quite dark .....

so i will be getting a light meter, any tried and used ones you would recommend?

[huwevans]

Well, the Weston meter (many versions over several decades) is the obvious, classic, and very reliable choice. But really, pretty much anything should do.

[Benchista]

The only thing against a Weston is that many of them are no longer that accurate, as the selenium cells have had their day. Mind you, mine is fine.

[Manofolympus]

I, too, have a Weston Master V, though mine came from a car boot sale with case and invercone in a photo bag (wot, that bag of old camera stuff?-a fiver mate- inc meter, Olympus winder 2, misc focussing screens and filters etc-one of my better car boots!).
You could try to track down a leningrad meter which will do the job but will be cheaper than a Weston.

[Benchista]

My Euro Master II with case, cone, box and instructions cost me - £4! Great meter.

[huwevans]

The only thing against a Weston is that many of them are no longer that accurate, as the selenium cells have had their day.

The same is potentially true for any selenium cell meter, but TBH the accounts I've read suggest that those that fail are actually quite few, and decades of reliable service is the norm. Anything from about a IV or V onwards is more than likely to be good. Still, it's easy enough to check them against a known good meter (like that in a modern SLR) by checking the indicated exposure for a plain, even-toned target.

[Benchista]

Yes, I'm sure you're right.

I've got quite a few selenium meters, all told, and only one - an ancient Weston Universal 617 Type II (like this one) - is actually way off the mark - the rest are all accuarate enough for neg film, at least.

[huwevans]

I remember a comment Roger Hicks made in one of his books, that he had once compared five Westons of varying vintage and found them all within 1/5 of a stop of each other. Can't be bad!

[beejaybee]

In fact many nagative shooters deliberately over-expose by as much as a stop for the benefits mentioned above.

Indeed. IIRC in the 1960s FP3 "jumped" from 64 to 125 (it was called ASA then, but it's the same as what we now call ISO) with no change in the formulation of the film or the developing instructions .... just a change in the density at which the speed rating was measured. My Dad (who almost always used FP3) simply carried on as before, rating it at 64 ASA and underdeveloping by 10% because he preferred a slightly "thin" negative.

[Manofolympus]

All the above just underlines the fact that, within a reasonable range, there is no absolutely correct exposure for B+W negative film.

[snowqueen]

Thanks everyone for your advice and thoughts,
i will tonight pick up my teachers rolli flex, he has very kindly lent it to me for a while to see the difference between that and the ensign and there was me thinking he really didnt like me! roll on the weekend