I use an MC meter on my M3. I also occasionally use an old Gossen Lunasix meter.

I was wondering how the Gossen Lunasix compares to the latest Minolta and Sekonic meters. Is it time for an upgrade to a newer hand held meter ?

Regards,

Tony Salce

-- Tony Salce (NadinaTony@bigpond.com), December 14, 2001

Answers

Hi Tony,

I have the same set-up as you do. I find the Gossen to be very accurate, however it uses 1.3 volt mercury batteries that I can no longer obtain in Canada. I currently use 1.5 silver oxide batteries, but do not know how this effects the readings.

Regards,

Alan (new to this group)

-- Alan Purves (lpurves@mnsi.net), December 14, 2001.

I use a Gossen Luna Pro S. It's an analog meter, which I find to be more friendly to someone who was taught to tell the time by where the big and little hands are on the clock. The Luna Pro's are work horses and they are supported by Gossen USA. Digital or analog is a personal preference, but I like to see the whole range of exposure options at one glance on the analog dial.

Alan, Gossen will retrofit your meter for non-mercury batteries. They did so for me, and calibrated the meter while they did it. You can e-mail them at service@bogenphoto.com, or call 201-818-0060.

-- Jeff Polaski (polaski@acm.org), December 14, 2001.

The Lunasix is an old meter which uses a CdS cell and batteries that are not easily available. CdS has a memory, which is why the meter has a shutter: to keep bright light off the cell when it is not being used for a reading. And, of course, it does not measure flash.

The new generation of Gossen (and Sekonic and Minolta) meters use Silicon Photo Diodes and will measure flash. I use a LunaStar F and love it. My only complaints are that it takes a 9V battery (instead of AA's) and it does not have a mechanicical shut-off.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), December 14, 2001.

I've been using the newish Gossen Sixtomat F (digital) for a few years now. An excellent light-weight and compact meter which runs off a single AA cell. In fact, I never use the built-in meter in the M6 or R6.2 but always take incident readings with the Sixtomat. Hasn't let me down once.

-- Andrew Nemeth (azn@nemeng.com), December 14, 2001.

I have a Lunasix (European Lunapro) that I used from 1970 until last year, when I got a Digital Lunapro. It does the basics just as well, but takes easy-to-find batteries, is smaller and lighter, and has some extra functions (like the ability to average over several stored readings) that I actually find useful. I don't use flash, so this does everything I need, but then so did the Lunasix...

-- Tim Nelson (timothy.nelson@yale.edu), December 14, 2001.

Like the other respondents, I see no reason to change from an analog meter if that works for you. I love my Luna Pro. :-)

But if you want a really small analog meter to tuck in your pocket along with an M3 -- check out the Sekonic L-208. It's sort of like a miniaturized Luna Pro.

-- Rolfe Tessem (rolfe@ldp.com), December 14, 2001.

Tony, actually I like analog meters better because I see exposure as an analog phenomenon. I can transfer the reading better from the continuously variable needle position to the continuously variable aperture ring, compared to interpreting a number like f/4 (8). Sure, that's a little wider than f/5.6, but interpretation is still required. With the analog needle, it's a direct transfer.

But time marches on. My old Norwood Director incident meter works, but the needle is sticky. My Spectra Professional is very accurate, but too bulky to be in scale with the Leica. And I bwoke my beloved Minolta AutoMeter. I dwopped it and they can't fix it.

So. I replaced the mechanical Autometer with a digital AutoMeter IV F. My old reflected-light 7.5 degree spot attachment wotks on it. The results are accurate. It agrees well with the M6 meter. And, it has a quasi-analog scale along with the numerical readout. Since that scale has only 1/3 stop resolution, not really continuosly analog. But at least it's something. Good meter, but putting on the reflected light viewer is a nuisance.

My next move in the quest for a perfect Leica-size meter was the Gossen Luna-Pro Digital F. It has convenient switching from incident to reflected, just like your Luna-Six. And, it's shirt-pocket size. I'm still evaluating the accuracy of this meter. On reflected light it agrees well with my old reliables. The incident readings seem off, though. I'm just not sure yet. Apart from this, I think it's a good handheld for 35mm.

SO if you do decide to retire your Luna-Six, you might look at the new Luna-Pro F. I'll try to post an update on the incident-light accuracy when I'm ready. But, you know, you might just consider having the Luna-Six updated. Who knows, maybe one day I'll spot a Luna-Six, buy it, and do the same thing . . .

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), December 15, 2001.

Thank you for your replies. I think I will save my money and keep the lunasix. One further question, will keeping it out of its case have any effect on the cell. It's rather bulky with the case.

Regards,

Tony Salce

-- Tony Salce (NadinaTony@bigpond.com), December 15, 2001.

OK, here's the update. When taking the reflected readings off the gray card, they do agree well with the incident readings, for the Gossen digital Luna-Pro F. It also agrees well with the digital Minolta and the Spectra for incident light readings. My initial reservations were based on impressions in practical situations, when I thought the incident and reflected light readings differed more than I thought they should.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), December 15, 2001.

Hi - I use a Sekonic L308 which is small and compact, and also measures flash. I also use a Gossen Lunasix which I have as an occasional backup because it's slightly bigger and doesn't fit too well with a roll or two of HP5 in the pocket of my favourite jacket but - IMO - is just as acurate in most lighting situations as the Sekonic. The digital meters give instant readouts and tend to be more sensitive in lower lighting conditions - I think you can also add a 'spot' attachment for the current L308 and others in the Sekonic and Minolta range which might be good for some photographers but I've never bothered with this. Both types do an excellent job in a different way - much like Leica and Nikon photographers! If you feel the need..........go ahead and change!

-- Chris Timotheou (nowayout@btinternet.com), December 20, 2001.

The digital meters give instant readouts and tend to be more sensitive in lower lighting conditions

I don't think this is true. The Lunasix spec goes far lower than all current digital meters. Digital vs analog has nothing to do with the metering method, solely the display.

However, it is a problem that meter cells appear to deteriorate over time. I've never run into a relatively new (at the time) hand held meter that was inaccurate, although calibration sometimes differs, but I have had older ones that became non-linear in their response. With the Lunasix, you probably want to check it against another meter from time to time.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), December 20, 2001.

I use a Gossen Lunasix when I use my screwmounts and I have checked it against my M6 and my R4s(which I use for colour). It is spot on against each of them. I also have a Gossen Super Pilot(smaller and more compact) and it matches the Lunasix readings exactly. Gossen seem to be very reliable but like everyone I have had to switch from mercury batteries. I have not noticed any slide off compared with the M6.

-- Tony Brookes (gdz00@lineone.net), January 08, 2002.