And it also has aperture priority and one press of a button compares the manual setting with the cameras auto choice. Back-lighting as JJ says is a problem as always for the auto and I don't use back-light buttons. It really is simple and easy to toggle auto to manual. You press a button (most likely the aperture one if you leave gain off and set shutter at 60) for the camera to put all the controls in the ball park. If you need a ND it tells you, and then you fine tune manually. Love it and to answer the question I though I read it was 100ASA, but if you have a light meter you can test the camera of course and see for yourself.

Thanks guys for the replies. I'm kind of amazed that more people aren't in the habit of using light meters with video. The more I ask people, the more I hear that it's "just for film" or seen as "trying to look like a cinematographer" (like that's bad). Coming from a photography background, I feel like light meters are very useful tools for anybody that does almost anything with light. We even saw a lot of people stop using them when they went to digital photography. Are there any light meter evangelists out there?

What's the difference between using a gray card and using an exposure meter? You can get the same results (in most cases).

OK, I have been using all kinds of exposure meters, including spot and incident light meters. For some, they are a great way to check contrast levels in a scene, as they just prefer working that way.

If broadcast video folks aren't as enthusiastic about them, it is probably because they can get the same information plus much more from video scopes than from running around with an exposure meter.

Even just a serious, calibrated production monitor can do as much for video as an exposure meter.

In the end it's just a personal preference, let the end result be what's judged, not how we got there.

Now if you are shooting in the field with no DV Rack, no calibrated studio monitor, no video-scopes, just the cameras zebras, would then there be some use for a light meter?

I ask because the one problem I'm still getting with the FX1 is a lack of dynamic range. Seems I'm always stretching the black and white points in post.

Michael

I'm not trying to say that a light meter is the only pure way to measure light. That would be dumb and obviously not true. I'm just saying that it is a very useful tool that I like to use in addition to the many other options available. God forbid I have to prelight a location before we set up to shoot or someone drops the monitor and totally destroys it. I hope we would be prepared (not only having a meter but also the knowledge of how to use it effectively) so that we are still able to produce a great end result.

It really isn't necessary. I am a still shooter by profession and the difference is that when using hot-lights you can visually see the volume of light in addition to the relation to the background and also the ratios from key to fill.

There really is no need for a light meter when shooting digital stills either other than to get the ratios (key/fill and background/hairlight) correct as the histogram tells you everything you need to know about the overall exposure and you can visually see the relationship between key/fill etc.

With the Z1U you simply use the Zebra patterns to judge exposure (if you don't have a reference monitor). You can see everything else so if you are familiar at all with the inverse square law you can easily estimate how much you would need to move a light to increase/decrease exposure by 1/2, 1, 2 stops etc.

Duncan