K1000 light meter

**MichaelaPDX** · 07-04-2017, 07:23 PM

I have two K1000's and they both meter light the same, i.e. when I set both to the same ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, the light meter needle is centered. Now I didn't give much thought to the accuracy of the built in light meters until I got my first roll of BW film developed in which almost all of the exposures were from a bright sunny day. Almost all of the images are overexposed. I then used an iphone light meter app and found that when the app showed that, at ISO 100, I should be shooting at 125 f16, my two K1000's were centering the needle at f8. I don't know which to believe but I certainly lean towards the app reading based on that last role of over exposed images. Any thoughts? I think I might just invest in a good light meter and ditch the onboard metering.

**patrick9** · 07-04-2017, 07:49 PM

First question that comes to mind is . Did you have the camera ASA set to 100 and have 100 speed film in the camera. It is odd that both cameras would read the same. My K1000 from the mid 70's is still accurate .
Second is the lens actually stopping down when you set the aperture? Those are two questions that popped to mind.

**MichaelaPDX** · 07-04-2017, 08:24 PM

Yes to both questions. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that something about modern batteries will cause the light meter in the K1000's to be off and that you might need to compensate for that. So far though I have not been able to find that mentioned anywhere.

kmurphy220 · 07-04-2017, 09:32 PM

Weird, both my K1000 workhorses are almost perfect with metering, using cheap modern LR44 batteries. One being an original Made in Japan black edition, and the other being a brown leather SE. I've run slide film through both with nearly every exposure being spot on, and a few being off due to mass light variances. I do know that I had had one a while ago that it was about stop off to where it liked things bright. But when I used it, I was just sunny 16 ruling it. That being said the shot you posted actually looks pretty good, and printable to me, but that's personal preference I guess. Your meter could also be fooled if you're using old M42 glass. My SE can't stand metering with my terribly yellowed Super Tak 50.

Ranchu · 07-05-2017, 12:28 AM

The picture is perfectly exposed. It's possible both camera's meters would be out by the same amount, but not likely. The K1000 should be able to use any battery that will fit, but it's a good idea to avoid alkaline because of the corrosion they can leave.

edmundrt · 07-05-2017, 12:33 AM

That picture looks perfectly exposed to me. Smartphone based metering apps are a useful guide when using forgiving negative films, but are only accurate to within a couple of stops (which means the K1000 giving f8 and the app f16 is perfectly possible). I shouldn't worry too much if I were you.

Xmas · 07-05-2017, 02:36 AM

To judge exposure you look at the negative or scan as negative.

The K1000 has a balanced galvanometer ie has two electro magnets but does need a fresh battery! It will work ok 1/3 stop on alkaline, zinc or silver. If the alkaline is kaput goodness knows! It has an auto off switch in dim light ok in my gbag for years!

dmr · 07-05-2017, 02:57 AM

I have one K1000 body which I do not use now because of another issue, but the meter has always been accurate from what I can tell. I've been told that the K1000 (and other Pentaxi of that era) are relatively insensitive to slight battery voltage variation, compared to many others.

I've been kind of vocal off and on about being frustrated by meter accuracy, or more correctly not knowing if they are correct. I just find it so mindboggling that we have means to measure just about any quantity of anything there is (volume, mass, length, etc.) with very close precision and accuracy, but not light! Calibrated light sources are well beyond my budget!

The best I've been able to do is a sanity check under sunny-16 conditions. My back yard (looking into a wooded area out the back door) in early afternoon sunlight is very close to sunny-16 on all of my cameras. If I suspect that metering is off, that's what I check for. They tell me (the ubuquitous "they") that afternoon sunlight with a clear sky is very consistently just over 100,000 lux.

In fact, it was not that long ago that I answered a thread about using the "wrong" battery in a Canon GIII on another board and I did a quick comparison between the GIII that I have (with the "wrong" battery) and the Pentax MX and found them less than 1/2 stop in disagreement.

I would sure love to have a cheap and convenient "lab standard" light but those apparently don't exist, other than the sun. A 50 cent ruler is accurate within a percent or so. A $1.99 set of measuring spoons has to be within a few percent at most. The bathroom scale is too accurate!

How about light?

**MichaelaPDX** · 07-05-2017, 06:16 AM

Thanks for the feedback on the photo. Perhaps I'm being too critical of my photographs and creating an issue where none exists.

---------- Post added 07-05-17 at 06:22 AM ----------

Originally posted by dmr

I just find it so mindboggling that we have means to measure just about any quantity of anything there is (volume, mass, length, etc.) with very close precision and accuracy, but not light! Calibrated light sources are well beyond my budget!

Agreed. Although I could stretch it and afford to purchase a new exposure meter, I don't think I can justify the expense based on the type and amount of photography I enjoy. I'm now looking through Ebay for an older analog meter but I understand that accuracy on these older units is very iffy given their age.

leekil · 07-05-2017, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by mikecnorthwest

Yes to both questions. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that something about modern batteries will cause the light meter in the K1000's to be off and that you might need to compensate for that. So far though I have not been able to find that mentioned anywhere.

To follow up on Xmas' comment, the K1000 manual mention that both silver oxide and alkaline batteries can be used, so you shouldn't encounter an issue with the meter and modern batteries.

**ChrisPlatt** · 07-05-2017, 03:55 PM

My wife has a Pentax K1000 and I have the similar Pentax KM.
The metering pattern of both is mildly centerweighted/averaging.

Large areas of light or dark in a scene may "fool" the meter, but it won't fool you.
Take a closeup reading of your subject (or an 18% gray card) when possible or
compensate based on experience. Used thoughtfully the K1000 meter works fine.

Chris

PS - 44/76/357 1.5V batteries all work well. Silver oxide are more reliable than alkaline.

Pioneer · 07-05-2017, 11:38 PM

Based on the photo posted, I would say your K1000 meter was doing its job correctly. There is still some detail in the bright side of the what appears to be the caboose, you can pick out detail in the shadows underneath the cars, and the passenger car reveals some very pleasing tones of gray. However, if you feel the need to get a more accurate light reading before taking the photograph, just use a gray card.

As for light metering accuracy, there are certainly very accurate methods of measuring light. However, they are really overkill for photography, even slide photography. Center weighted measurements, such as the metering used by your K1000, are usually quite good, but are older technology and can be fooled a little bit easier and may require you to give a bit more thought to the exposure.

Matrix metering, such as that done by many modern dslr cameras, is more accurate because the meter is measuring many different parts of the scene separately, and then comparing that to a library of options contained in the camera's computer memory. This is certainly more accurate but also requires a lot of electronics and computer software.

Spot metering, once you learn to do it properly, is probably the most accurate metering method. But it is not as easy nor as quick for most people to work with as the other two methods. It also makes it easier to make judgement calls regarding the exposure you prefer if the dynamic range of your scene is wider than your film (or sensor) can work with. Do you let the highlights blow out...or do you let the shadows loose much of their texture and detail?

But, if you use a gray card, your K1000 meter can be almost as useful as most other meters out there. Metering the gray card gives you an accurate reading of the light illuminating your scene. Then it is up to you, with your experience, to decide if the full dynamic range of the scene can be captured, or if you are going to have to let the highlights or shadows suffer. Based on your photo I would have to say that the scene had just a tad more dynamic range then the film could capture. Not much, maybe a third of a stop. But considering that there is really no way to make 1/3rd stop adjustments with a K1000 I think the meter, and the camera, did a pretty good job for you.

No matter how you measure it, and no matter how accurate your meter is measuring the light, you still have to decide if you want to use the meter's advice or if you want to modify the reading.

I have been working with the K1000 meter since the mid 80s and have found that it is amazingly useful and accurate and the photo you posted gives me no reason to change my mind.

dmr · 07-06-2017, 02:07 AM

In looking at that photo a bit more critically, it appears to me that it may be underexposed a stop or so. It doesn't look like any highlights are blown out to solid 255 and the darker shadows under the train cars (the clearest parts of the negative) appear to lack detail. My guess is that there was some room for exposure at the top.

I agree with Pioneer that the meter was probably doing its job. The scene, as a whole, is relatively bright, and the meter would average that and suggest a lower EV. (Remember that the meter offers a suggestion, not a mandate!)

If I were shooting that, and it were an important shot, I would definitely bracket. It's a still subject and film (or memory card space) is cheap. On a more casual shot I would have probably opened up the iris a click or two, which is easy with the K1000. With any of several other cameras I would have probably "trapped" the exposure on the surface of the left car, which looks to me to be more of average luminance, and recomposed.

This is a good example of a high contrast situation. Bright sunlight with light parts of the subject, and fairly deep shadows. You would definitely miss the black cat hiding under the train!

Xmas · 07-06-2017, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by dmr

In looking at that photo a bit more critically, it appears to me that it may be underexposed a stop or so. It doesn't look like any highlights are blown out to solid 255 and the darker shadows under the train cars (the clearest parts of the negative) appear to lack detail. My guess is that there was some room for exposure at the top.

I agree with Pioneer that the meter was probably doing its job. The scene, as a whole, is relatively bright, and the meter would average that and suggest a lower EV. (Remember that the meter offers a suggestion, not a mandate!)

If I were shooting that, and it were an important shot, I would definitely bracket. It's a still subject and film (or memory card space) is cheap. On a more casual shot I would have probably opened up the iris a click or two, which is easy with the K1000. With any of several other cameras I would have probably "trapped" the exposure on the surface of the left car, which looks to me to be more of average luminance, and recomposed.

This is a good example of a high contrast situation. Bright sunlight with light parts of the subject, and fairly deep shadows. You would definitely miss the black cat hiding under the train!

I'd concur
It depends what you want but if there is no silver in the negative area under the train that is underexposure if you are wet printing. If you are scanning you may not get any detail in the high lights. An interesting compromise but the camera meter seems ok. I shoot with 1/2 box ISO for more shadow detail.

**MichaelaPDX** · 07-06-2017, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by Xmas

I'd concur
It depends what you want but if there is no silver in the negative area under the train that is underexposure if you are wet printing. If you are scanning you may not get any detail in the high lights. An interesting compromise but the camera meter seems ok. I shoot with 1/2 box ISO for more shadow detail.

I went back today to where this exposure was made and made several more from f/22 to f/8. I went back at the same time of day and the weather was the same as well, sunny with no clouds. It will be interesting to see the results.

---------- Post added 07-06-17 at 07:33 PM ----------

Originally posted by Pioneer

Based on the photo posted, I would say your K1000 meter was doing its job correctly. There is still some detail in the bright side of the what appears to be the caboose, you can pick out detail in the shadows underneath the cars, and the passenger car reveals some very pleasing tones of gray. However, if you feel the need to get a more accurate light reading before taking the photograph, just use a gray card.

As for light metering accuracy, there are certainly very accurate methods of measuring light. However, they are really overkill for photography, even slide photography. Center weighted measurements, such as the metering used by your K1000, are usually quite good, but are older technology and can be fooled a little bit easier and may require you to give a bit more thought to the exposure.

Matrix metering, such as that done by many modern dslr cameras, is more accurate because the meter is measuring many different parts of the scene separately, and then comparing that to a library of options contained in the camera's computer memory. This is certainly more accurate but also requires a lot of electronics and computer software.

Spot metering, once you learn to do it properly, is probably the most accurate metering method. But it is not as easy nor as quick for most people to work with as the other two methods. It also makes it easier to make judgement calls regarding the exposure you prefer if the dynamic range of your scene is wider than your film (or sensor) can work with. Do you let the highlights blow out...or do you let the shadows loose much of their texture and detail?

But, if you use a gray card, your K1000 meter can be almost as useful as most other meters out there. Metering the gray card gives you an accurate reading of the light illuminating your scene. Then it is up to you, with your experience, to decide if the full dynamic range of the scene can be captured, or if you are going to have to let the highlights or shadows suffer. Based on your photo I would have to say that the scene had just a tad more dynamic range then the film could capture. Not much, maybe a third of a stop. But considering that there is really no way to make 1/3rd stop adjustments with a K1000 I think the meter, and the camera, did a pretty good job for you.

No matter how you measure it, and no matter how accurate your meter is measuring the light, you still have to decide if you want to use the meter's advice or if you want to modify the reading.

I have been working with the K1000 meter since the mid 80s and have found that it is amazingly useful and accurate and the photo you posted gives me no reason to change my mind.

Thank you for such a thorough and informative response. I really appreciate it.

07-04-2017, 07:23 PM	#1
MichaelaPDX Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 126	K1000 light meter I have two K1000's and they both meter light the same, i.e. when I set both to the same ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, the light meter needle is centered. Now I didn't give much thought to the accuracy of the built in light meters until I got my first roll of BW film developed in which almost all of the exposures were from a bright sunny day. Almost all of the images are overexposed. I then used an iphone light meter app and found that when the app showed that, at ISO 100, I should be shooting at 125 f16, my two K1000's were centering the needle at f8. I don't know which to believe but I certainly lean towards the app reading based on that last role of over exposed images. Any thoughts? I think I might just invest in a good light meter and ditch the onboard metering.

07-05-2017, 11:38 PM	#12
Pioneer Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Wandering the Streets Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,411	Based on the photo posted, I would say your K1000 meter was doing its job correctly. There is still some detail in the bright side of the what appears to be the caboose, you can pick out detail in the shadows underneath the cars, and the passenger car reveals some very pleasing tones of gray. However, if you feel the need to get a more accurate light reading before taking the photograph, just use a gray card. As for light metering accuracy, there are certainly very accurate methods of measuring light. However, they are really overkill for photography, even slide photography. Center weighted measurements, such as the metering used by your K1000, are usually quite good, but are older technology and can be fooled a little bit easier and may require you to give a bit more thought to the exposure. Matrix metering, such as that done by many modern dslr cameras, is more accurate because the meter is measuring many different parts of the scene separately, and then comparing that to a library of options contained in the camera's computer memory. This is certainly more accurate but also requires a lot of electronics and computer software. Spot metering, once you learn to do it properly, is probably the most accurate metering method. But it is not as easy nor as quick for most people to work with as the other two methods. It also makes it easier to make judgement calls regarding the exposure you prefer if the dynamic range of your scene is wider than your film (or sensor) can work with. Do you let the highlights blow out...or do you let the shadows loose much of their texture and detail? But, if you use a gray card, your K1000 meter can be almost as useful as most other meters out there. Metering the gray card gives you an accurate reading of the light illuminating your scene. Then it is up to you, with your experience, to decide if the full dynamic range of the scene can be captured, or if you are going to have to let the highlights or shadows suffer. Based on your photo I would have to say that the scene had just a tad more dynamic range then the film could capture. Not much, maybe a third of a stop. But considering that there is really no way to make 1/3rd stop adjustments with a K1000 I think the meter, and the camera, did a pretty good job for you. No matter how you measure it, and no matter how accurate your meter is measuring the light, you still have to decide if you want to use the meter's advice or if you want to modify the reading. I have been working with the K1000 meter since the mid 80s and have found that it is amazingly useful and accurate and the photo you posted gives me no reason to change my mind. Last edited by Pioneer; 07-05-2017 at 11:46 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K1000 Light Meter Calibration - Aperture has no effect on light meter?	appalachian1	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	5	03-14-2017 07:08 PM
K1000 Light Meter	Rexjarvis	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	7	01-17-2017 04:22 AM
K1000 Light Meter acting up	dragovi	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	8	10-07-2016 11:15 PM
[Help] Cameras with similar light meter as K1000	nlpthk	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	10	07-21-2015 02:02 PM
Pentax K1000 Light Meter Issues with M42 lense	jwfrench89	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	17	05-04-2013 10:07 AM

07-04-2017, 07:49 PM	#2
patrick9 Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Murfreesboro Tennessee Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,458	First question that comes to mind is . Did you have the camera ASA set to 100 and have 100 speed film in the camera. It is odd that both cameras would read the same. My K1000 from the mid 70's is still accurate . Second is the lens actually stopping down when you set the aperture? Those are two questions that popped to mind.

07-04-2017, 08:24 PM	#3
MichaelaPDX Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 126 Original Poster	Yes to both questions. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that something about modern batteries will cause the light meter in the K1000's to be off and that you might need to compensate for that. So far though I have not been able to find that mentioned anywhere.

07-04-2017, 09:32 PM	#4
kmurphy220 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Photos: Albums Posts: 235	Weird, both my K1000 workhorses are almost perfect with metering, using cheap modern LR44 batteries. One being an original Made in Japan black edition, and the other being a brown leather SE. I've run slide film through both with nearly every exposure being spot on, and a few being off due to mass light variances. I do know that I had had one a while ago that it was about stop off to where it liked things bright. But when I used it, I was just sunny 16 ruling it. That being said the shot you posted actually looks pretty good, and printable to me, but that's personal preference I guess. Your meter could also be fooled if you're using old M42 glass. My SE can't stand metering with my terribly yellowed Super Tak 50.

07-05-2017, 12:28 AM	#5
Ranchu Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 151	The picture is perfectly exposed. It's possible both camera's meters would be out by the same amount, but not likely. The K1000 should be able to use any battery that will fit, but it's a good idea to avoid alkaline because of the corrosion they can leave.

07-05-2017, 12:33 AM	#6
edmundrt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Nagoya Posts: 577	That picture looks perfectly exposed to me. Smartphone based metering apps are a useful guide when using forgiving negative films, but are only accurate to within a couple of stops (which means the K1000 giving f8 and the app f16 is perfectly possible). I shouldn't worry too much if I were you.

07-05-2017, 02:36 AM	#7
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	To judge exposure you look at the negative or scan as negative. The K1000 has a balanced galvanometer ie has two electro magnets but does need a fresh battery! It will work ok 1/3 stop on alkaline, zinc or silver. If the alkaline is kaput goodness knows! It has an auto off switch in dim light ok in my gbag for years!

07-05-2017, 02:57 AM	#8
dmr Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2017 Location: Somewhere in Middle America Posts: 106	I have one K1000 body which I do not use now because of another issue, but the meter has always been accurate from what I can tell. I've been told that the K1000 (and other Pentaxi of that era) are relatively insensitive to slight battery voltage variation, compared to many others. I've been kind of vocal off and on about being frustrated by meter accuracy, or more correctly not knowing if they are correct. I just find it so mindboggling that we have means to measure just about any quantity of anything there is (volume, mass, length, etc.) with very close precision and accuracy, but not light! Calibrated light sources are well beyond my budget! The best I've been able to do is a sanity check under sunny-16 conditions. My back yard (looking into a wooded area out the back door) in early afternoon sunlight is very close to sunny-16 on all of my cameras. If I suspect that metering is off, that's what I check for. They tell me (the ubuquitous "they") that afternoon sunlight with a clear sky is very consistently just over 100,000 lux. In fact, it was not that long ago that I answered a thread about using the "wrong" battery in a Canon GIII on another board and I did a quick comparison between the GIII that I have (with the "wrong" battery) and the Pentax MX and found them less than 1/2 stop in disagreement. I would sure love to have a cheap and convenient "lab standard" light but those apparently don't exist, other than the sun. A 50 cent ruler is accurate within a percent or so. A $1.99 set of measuring spoons has to be within a few percent at most. The bathroom scale is too accurate! How about light?

07-05-2017, 06:16 AM	#9
MichaelaPDX Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 126 Original Poster	Thanks for the feedback on the photo. Perhaps I'm being too critical of my photographs and creating an issue where none exists. ---------- Post added 07-05-17 at 06:22 AM ---------- Originally posted by dmr I just find it so mindboggling that we have means to measure just about any quantity of anything there is (volume, mass, length, etc.) with very close precision and accuracy, but not light! Calibrated light sources are well beyond my budget! Agreed. Although I could stretch it and afford to purchase a new exposure meter, I don't think I can justify the expense based on the type and amount of photography I enjoy. I'm now looking through Ebay for an older analog meter but I understand that accuracy on these older units is very iffy given their age.

07-05-2017, 09:16 AM	#10
leekil Pentaxian Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 2,003	Originally posted by mikecnorthwest Yes to both questions. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that something about modern batteries will cause the light meter in the K1000's to be off and that you might need to compensate for that. So far though I have not been able to find that mentioned anywhere. To follow up on Xmas' comment, the K1000 manual mention that both silver oxide and alkaline batteries can be used, so you shouldn't encounter an issue with the meter and modern batteries.

07-05-2017, 03:55 PM	#11
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,692	My wife has a Pentax K1000 and I have the similar Pentax KM. The metering pattern of both is mildly centerweighted/averaging. Large areas of light or dark in a scene may "fool" the meter, but it won't fool you. Take a closeup reading of your subject (or an 18% gray card) when possible or compensate based on experience. Used thoughtfully the K1000 meter works fine. Chris PS - 44/76/357 1.5V batteries all work well. Silver oxide are more reliable than alkaline.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-06-2017, 02:07 AM	#13
dmr Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2017 Location: Somewhere in Middle America Posts: 106	In looking at that photo a bit more critically, it appears to me that it may be underexposed a stop or so. It doesn't look like any highlights are blown out to solid 255 and the darker shadows under the train cars (the clearest parts of the negative) appear to lack detail. My guess is that there was some room for exposure at the top. I agree with Pioneer that the meter was probably doing its job. The scene, as a whole, is relatively bright, and the meter would average that and suggest a lower EV. (Remember that the meter offers a suggestion, not a mandate!) If I were shooting that, and it were an important shot, I would definitely bracket. It's a still subject and film (or memory card space) is cheap. On a more casual shot I would have probably opened up the iris a click or two, which is easy with the K1000. With any of several other cameras I would have probably "trapped" the exposure on the surface of the left car, which looks to me to be more of average luminance, and recomposed. This is a good example of a high contrast situation. Bright sunlight with light parts of the subject, and fairly deep shadows. You would definitely miss the black cat hiding under the train!

07-06-2017, 09:18 AM	#14
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	Originally posted by dmr In looking at that photo a bit more critically, it appears to me that it may be underexposed a stop or so. It doesn't look like any highlights are blown out to solid 255 and the darker shadows under the train cars (the clearest parts of the negative) appear to lack detail. My guess is that there was some room for exposure at the top. I agree with Pioneer that the meter was probably doing its job. The scene, as a whole, is relatively bright, and the meter would average that and suggest a lower EV. (Remember that the meter offers a suggestion, not a mandate!) If I were shooting that, and it were an important shot, I would definitely bracket. It's a still subject and film (or memory card space) is cheap. On a more casual shot I would have probably opened up the iris a click or two, which is easy with the K1000. With any of several other cameras I would have probably "trapped" the exposure on the surface of the left car, which looks to me to be more of average luminance, and recomposed. This is a good example of a high contrast situation. Bright sunlight with light parts of the subject, and fairly deep shadows. You would definitely miss the black cat hiding under the train! I'd concur It depends what you want but if there is no silver in the negative area under the train that is underexposure if you are wet printing. If you are scanning you may not get any detail in the high lights. An interesting compromise but the camera meter seems ok. I shoot with 1/2 box ISO for more shadow detail.

07-06-2017, 07:29 PM	#15
MichaelaPDX Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 126 Original Poster	Originally posted by Xmas I'd concur It depends what you want but if there is no silver in the negative area under the train that is underexposure if you are wet printing. If you are scanning you may not get any detail in the high lights. An interesting compromise but the camera meter seems ok. I shoot with 1/2 box ISO for more shadow detail. I went back today to where this exposure was made and made several more from f/22 to f/8. I went back at the same time of day and the weather was the same as well, sunny with no clouds. It will be interesting to see the results. ---------- Post added 07-06-17 at 07:33 PM ---------- Originally posted by Pioneer Based on the photo posted, I would say your K1000 meter was doing its job correctly. There is still some detail in the bright side of the what appears to be the caboose, you can pick out detail in the shadows underneath the cars, and the passenger car reveals some very pleasing tones of gray. However, if you feel the need to get a more accurate light reading before taking the photograph, just use a gray card. As for light metering accuracy, there are certainly very accurate methods of measuring light. However, they are really overkill for photography, even slide photography. Center weighted measurements, such as the metering used by your K1000, are usually quite good, but are older technology and can be fooled a little bit easier and may require you to give a bit more thought to the exposure. Matrix metering, such as that done by many modern dslr cameras, is more accurate because the meter is measuring many different parts of the scene separately, and then comparing that to a library of options contained in the camera's computer memory. This is certainly more accurate but also requires a lot of electronics and computer software. Spot metering, once you learn to do it properly, is probably the most accurate metering method. But it is not as easy nor as quick for most people to work with as the other two methods. It also makes it easier to make judgement calls regarding the exposure you prefer if the dynamic range of your scene is wider than your film (or sensor) can work with. Do you let the highlights blow out...or do you let the shadows loose much of their texture and detail? But, if you use a gray card, your K1000 meter can be almost as useful as most other meters out there. Metering the gray card gives you an accurate reading of the light illuminating your scene. Then it is up to you, with your experience, to decide if the full dynamic range of the scene can be captured, or if you are going to have to let the highlights or shadows suffer. Based on your photo I would have to say that the scene had just a tad more dynamic range then the film could capture. Not much, maybe a third of a stop. But considering that there is really no way to make 1/3rd stop adjustments with a K1000 I think the meter, and the camera, did a pretty good job for you. No matter how you measure it, and no matter how accurate your meter is measuring the light, you still have to decide if you want to use the meter's advice or if you want to modify the reading. I have been working with the K1000 meter since the mid 80s and have found that it is amazingly useful and accurate and the photo you posted gives me no reason to change my mind. Thank you for such a thorough and informative response. I really appreciate it.