Jump to content

SEKONIC 858D-U VS SPECTRA CINE IV SENSITIVITY


Recommended Posts

I'll first ask a question:

Is the Sekonic 858D-U more sensitive, equally sensitive, or less sensitive to the Spectra Cine IV?

Metering in Lux or Foot-candles the 858D-U seems to round the numbers much more. Sometimes it'll round by 50 or 100lux whereas the Spectra Cine has much more decimal information. What the hell?

Is there a setting I need to change on the Sekonic? I've gone through the menus many times and have read the manual and can't find anything.

It's supposedly more sensitive according to the specs on B&H. Is this marketing crap?

 

There's some things I love about this Sekonic (that I just purchased) but also many things that disappoint... The touch interface and overall physical design of the meter is fantastic. I love the spot meter! They should have added one more custom key though.

However the software should have been so much better. Especially by 2021! There's so many things that spring to mind when using this meter where I think  "this could have been done better" or "so this meter came out in 2017 and the software is this limited" or "what were they thinking?".

It's great to have a big touch sensitive screen but why are there so many common-sense-features that so many of us would benefit from instantly – as well as the sales of sekonic ! – if these were implemented. Worse, these are features that could be simply added by whoever is the software designer at Sekonic. It's simple stuff!

Quite disappointed really ?

 

Anyhow, could someone let me know where the setting is to make the Sekonic stop rounding up the Lux/Footcandles in the way that it does on factory content?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Can’t speak to the Sekonic 858D-U, but my L-558 Cine (2 generations older) is less sensitive than my Spectra Cine IV. It also only reads out in increments of 10fc, whereas the Spectra reads out in 1/10 fc increments. I think footcandles/lux readings are more of an afterthought with the Sekonic.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

Can’t speak to the Sekonic 858D-U, but my L-558 Cine (2 generations older) is less sensitive than my Spectra Cine IV. It also only reads out in increments of 10fc, whereas the Spectra reads out in 1/10 fc increments. I think footcandles/lux readings are more of an afterthought with the Sekonic.

Hey Satsuki, thx for your reply.

I'm afraid the same is true for the 858D-U meter, unless someone proves me wrong.

It's so odd from a business point of view that Sekonic would have such a function be an afterthought. Especially since it (and other features) would be so simple to implement as long as they'd care to pay someone competent to do that work.

Though they market the Sekonic for Cinematographers and Photographers, it seems there are much less afterthoughts for the latter. 

This is so frustrating. I don't think the Lux/Footcandle reading on the 858D are exact enough for my doings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
4 hours ago, Iggy Heringa said:

Hey Satsuki, thx for your reply.

I'm afraid the same is true for the 858D-U meter, unless someone proves me wrong.

It's so odd from a business point of view that Sekonic would have such a function be an afterthought. Especially since it (and other features) would be so simple to implement as long as they'd care to pay someone competent to do that work.

Though they market the Sekonic for Cinematographers and Photographers, it seems there are much less afterthoughts for the latter. 

This is so frustrating. I don't think the Lux/Footcandle reading on the 858D are exact enough for my doings.

I think the Sekonic is more of a multi-tool, it has spot/incident/flash/fc/lux/fL/filter comp/shutter comp, etc. Trying to appeal to both stills and film/video markets. Whereas the Spectra is more of a single purpose precision instrument made for cinematographers. I know they also make a spot attachment for the Cine IV, but it seems rather cumbersome and I’ve never seen anyone use it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

I think the Sekonic is more of a multi-tool, it has spot/incident/flash/fc/lux/fL/filter comp/shutter comp, etc. Trying to appeal to both stills and film/video markets. Whereas the Spectra is more of a single purpose precision instrument made for cinematographers. I know they also make a spot attachment for the Cine IV, but it seems rather cumbersome and I’ve never seen anyone use it. 

Yes, it's a multitool but it could have been a perfect one.

What's bothersome is that I believe all the necessary tech is present in the Sekonic but it feels like the developers where to lazy (for lack of a better term) to try and make it perfect. It's as if the developers of the Sekonic 858D ran a marathon designing it, and suddenly stopped 30 minutes before the finish line. Not because of exhaustion but due to loss of interest. Stoically speaking that's fine. However, for us users, the users of the tool, it's mega frustrating. 

I felt for a while like writing a long email to Sekonic with how to improve the meter's menu system and options. Unfortunately, based on previous experience of a simple stock inventory inquiry of this meter (it was out of stock for while) to which they never replied, I won't bother.

I thought that in buying the Sekonic I would not need to resort to the Spectra as much anymore. 

Thank god I have Godox flashes to use this with, otherwise I would have returned this item.

Hopefully Sekonic will improve this meter. Or a competing product will appear. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

What I was sort of getting at is that a multi-tool will never be as good at a specific job as a dedicated tool.

For some jobs, the convenience of having to carry only one tool outweighs having to carry multiple dedicated tools. And sometimes you simply need the precision of exactly the right tool for the job, no matter how cumbersome. 

In other words - the multi-tool is a design feature, not a bug.  It just needs to be recognized for what it is, and what it isn’t. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Satsuki,

I have to respectfully disagree :)

Some multi-tools are better than others. 

For an example of a more successful one, take the very successful Audio Devices Mixpre field recorders. These are also, amongst others, audio interfaces! In both instances they are perfectly designed. Pretty much every feature from the hardware & circuitry that any user would ever want is implemented in the software. Nothing is an afterthought. The software interface is also incredible. The designers at Audio Devices are geniuses. 

Also, what about RGB fixtures? To a degree these could also be seen as multi-tools. Imagine that one of the brands would release a RGB fixture where the dimming capabilities in Bi-Color mode were crippled, whereas all works as it should in RGB. This Bi-Color dimming capability could have easily been implemented, but the designers just didn't do it. An afterthought.

In this consumer world of competing products, I would expect a brand with as much name recognition as Sekonic to put in a little more effort into designing their products. Instead it seems more of the money is going to the marketing department.

My feeling is that the Sekonics are much more geared towards photographers. It's absolutely ridiculous that a $599 light meter is so average with its lux/footcandle readings. Unless I'm mistaken, the sensitivity is there for it to be much better in this regard. And, as I said earlier, it would probably take just a day (max!) for any half competent person in this field to write the code into a new firmware. 

If Sekonic would pay me, I'd adjust the menu system and add features to make the whole experience of using the light meter faster, more efficient, less cluttered and more professional. Cinematographers especially, would be happy :)

So yeah, the 858D is a workable tool but a poorly designed one (as of 01/17/2021)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Satsuki Murashige said:

I think you are missing the forest for the trees, so to speak, but you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. 

Good luck in your search for the perfect light meter! ?

Haha. It's a matter of perspective Satsuki! ? 

Obviously, that perfect light meter does not exist, yet and your sarcasm is unnecessary here because I truly believe that there's a market here for other brands to take on Sekonic and provide something that is better thought out.

I just wished the 858D would have at least met my expectation of being a decently designed tool. It of course does need to be perfect. Nothing is. It's fine if some features are missing. However, when essential stuff is implemented poorly, it's inexcusable.

What has Sekonic done since 2017 and why did they release a product that feels so unfinished for cinematographers.

I'm done complaining for the next weeks! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
1 hour ago, Iggy Heringa said:

Haha. It's a matter of perspective Satsuki! ? 

Obviously, that perfect light meter does not exist, yet and your sarcasm is unnecessary here

No sarcasm intended at all, I apologize if it came off that way. I don’t believe there is an objectively ‘perfect’ meter, only one that is perfect for you. Hopefully, you will find the right fit. 

All the best, 

-Sats

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

No sarcasm intended at all, I apologize if it came off that way. I don’t believe there is an objectively ‘perfect’ meter, only one that is perfect for you. Hopefully, you will find the right fit. 

All the best, 

-Sats

No problemo at all ?

Have a great upcoming week and all the best too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I know it’s a dead thread but I thought I should leave it here in case someone is looking for it. I’m surprise about the findings of your Sekonics.

Maybe it has been a major software change (I highly doubt it as I’ve never updated mine) but my Sekonic 858 from 2019 is able to read 0.01 differences. Down to 0.10lx.

I haven’t used the spectra but I’m not sure how much more decimal can you get than this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...