The LX meter range may be limited by the lens speed which may be slow, a hand held isnt. My digital multi-pro gossen automatically indicates "error" if the light is out of range so I dont get "false" readings. What I do anytime the metered reading is over 1 second is start out the base exposure at the meter reading which is always going to be underexposed due to film reciprocal error. Then I bracket doubling the time exposure each time up to 4 more "stops" total. I've never NOT gotten at least one really good exposure in the selection. I would never attempt to do a shot like that with only a single exposure. Hell thats what 36 exposure rolls are for.....My time is worth more than a few frames of film. I dont leave it to chance.... So far the longest exposure I ever did in a series was about 20 minutes, and that is only once in a blue moon (pun intended). I have nothing against the LX, it's just that ANY built-in meter means very little to me, I rarely use built-in meters in the type of photography I do. To others I'm sure it important like event photography, etc. I'm not a fan of reflectance metering or AE, I prefer incidence and hand metered manual. As for the situation with the light changing during a time exposure I said before I dont want the light changing DURING the exposure. If it did I would just reshoot the frame... And there is the practical matter also how often do you actually take photos where the time is longer than 1 second? I know I take VERY few. I'm certainly not going to buy camera based on just on that feature when there is a cheap easy reliable solution like bracking with any camera, even an unmetered one on the rare occasion where something like that is needed. To each his own I guess. JCO
> -----Original Message----- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 5:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Bodies: K2 vs. KX vs. LX > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "J. C. O'Connell" > Subject: RE: Bodies: K2 vs. KX vs. LX > > > > > > > > Do you carry around the data sheets for all the different > > films you use? I don't. It's much easier and safer to bracket long > > exposures. > > AE & time exposures dont mix IMHO . BTW, if your going to override > > the AE with compensations, you might as well go manual > > and be done with it. > > No, but I do carry a notebook with such pertinent information in my gadget > bag for the half dozen films that I do use. > I cannot guarantee that the light conditions won't change > somewhat during a > several minute exposure. A cloud may obscure my light source (the moon, as > an example). > Since I can't change fate, I have the ability with the LX to roll with it. > The camera will respond to changes in light intensity during the exposure, > and will adjust the exposure time to compensate. > Here are two examples for the same scene type. > Photographer #1 is using a manual camera on bulb, and has made an ambient > light reading of the scene, taken reciprocity into account and decides an > exposure of three minutes is appropriate. > Unfortunately, at some point, a cloud obscures the major light source. > Poor Mr. Manual is hooped, as he no longer knows how much time to give the > exposure to complete it, so he closes the shutter and tries again. > Photographer #2 is using an LX on automatic. He also takes > reciprocity into > account by dialing in exposure compensation on the meter dial. > At the same time photographer #1 is getting screwed by mean old mother > nature and her bitchy ways, photographer # 2 is making bets with himself > about how much longer he will have to stand there. But, he knows > he will get > a correct exposure, because the camera makes the exposure > adjustment on the > fly. > The LX is unique in it's ability to do this, and this feature was > one of the > main draws to the camera for me. > > Lets go to another situation where the light is constant. > Photographer #1 makes a light reading, decides how much exposure > compensation to give for reciprocity and commits to the exposure. > Photographer #2 (remember, this guy has an LX) dials in the > needed exposure > compensation for reciprocity, trips the shutter and hangs out > until he hears > it close. > > OTOH, if you don't have an LX, you are pretty much stuck with > extrapolating > exposures from a meter which may be of questionable sensitivity > and accuracy > in low light conditions (there aren't many meters more sensitive than the > built in meter of the LX). > At that point, bracketing is the only choice you have, since you are, in > effect, guessing at the exposure anyway. > > I'm pretty good at guessing, the below link will take you to an image that > recieved somewhere in the range of a one hour exposure. The shadow detail > doesn't show up on the computer generated image unfortunately. The silver > print is absolutely 3 dimensional. > > http://www2.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=717188 > > At that sort of exposure times, bracketing is out of the question > anyway, as > to do a +1 and +2 exposure in addition to the normal would require a total > of 7 hours of exposure. > > William Robb > >
