To push or not to push

**jbinpg** · 11-20-2010, 06:57 PM

I finally had my first couple of days out in the field putting the K-5 through its paces. What an amazing machine. Remember those days of shooting Kodachrome when if you were off by more than half a stop it was a tosser? Not any more.

I have put together a brief discussion of the pushing capabilities of the K-5 here:

To push or not to push | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Jack

enoeske · 11-20-2010, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by jbinpg

I finally had my first couple of days out in the field putting the K-5 through its paces. What an amazing machine. Remember those days of shooting Kodachrome when if you were off by more than half a stop it was a tosser? Not any more.

I have put together a brief discussion of the pushing capabilities of the K-5 here:

To push or not to push | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Jack

Thanks for not discussing it here. I doubt anyone would be interested.

SpecialK · 11-20-2010, 09:16 PM

Franky, I could not navigate on your Flickr page, but it could just be me :-)

However, I gather from your comment that you used ISO 400 and pushed it 3 stops to be the equivalent of using ISO 12800.. If so, your math is off. 400/800/1600/3200/6400/12800.

secateurs · 11-20-2010, 09:31 PM

Originally posted by enoeske

Thanks for not discussing it here. I doubt anyone would be interested.

Ouch! Harsh!

Actually, i disagree. There is actually a setting in the camera which will automatically underexpose for you, because shadows are much easier to correct than blown highlights in the K-5. The setting is called "Highlight Correction".

There is also talk about circumventing high-ISO low level NR by shooting underexposed at 1600 and pushing. Talk to JohnBee about it.

**jbinpg** · 11-20-2010, 10:15 PM

@SpecialK: It was pushed 3.4 stops according to my photo program to get to an equivalent luminance level of the ISO12800 shot. This was just a confirmation for me of what JeffJS had already discovered when he pushed his dog shot 10 stops or so and still got a very usable image. No way I could have done this with my K20.

JeffJS · 11-20-2010, 11:10 PM

Originally posted by jbinpg

@SpecialK: It was pushed 3.4 stops according to my photo program to get to an equivalent luminance level of the ISO12800 shot. This was just a confirmation for me of what JeffJS had already discovered when he pushed his dog shot 10 stops or so and still got a very usable image. No way I could have done this with my K20.

It was a total of about 4 stops

.. Glad to see it confirmed though..

nulla · 11-21-2010, 12:58 AM

Originally posted by secateurs

Ouch! Harsh!

Actually, i disagree. There is actually a setting in the camera which will automatically underexpose for you, because shadows are much easier to correct than blown highlights in the K-5. The setting is called "Highlight Correction".

There is also talk about circumventing high-ISO low level NR by shooting underexposed at 1600 and pushing. Talk to JohnBee about it.

Thats correct... but I think it also sets your ISO to min 200

secateurs · 11-21-2010, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by nulla

Thats correct... but I think it also sets your ISO to min 200

Actually, it sets the min to 160, because in reality, at ISO 160 it is shooting a shot at ISO 80, 1 stop underexposed, and pushing it in-camera. This will make the most of the increased dynamic range of ISO 80.

11-20-2010, 06:57 PM	#1
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546	To push or not to push I finally had my first couple of days out in the field putting the K-5 through its paces. What an amazing machine. Remember those days of shooting Kodachrome when if you were off by more than half a stop it was a tosser? Not any more. I have put together a brief discussion of the pushing capabilities of the K-5 here: To push or not to push \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! Jack

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Macro Mmmmmmm Now if I Push Hard Enough...	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	2	11-13-2010 12:23 AM
Are old push/pull zoom lenses better for video?	jake14mw	Video Recording and Processing	3	01-16-2010 10:38 AM
push pull zooms?	LMRacing	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	08-16-2009 10:42 PM
Does CVS know how to push and pull process?	OniFactor	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	10	06-23-2008 06:29 AM

11-20-2010, 07:01 PM	#2
enoeske Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Surprise, Az Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,136	Originally posted by jbinpg I finally had my first couple of days out in the field putting the K-5 through its paces. What an amazing machine. Remember those days of shooting Kodachrome when if you were off by more than half a stop it was a tosser? Not any more. I have put together a brief discussion of the pushing capabilities of the K-5 here: To push or not to push \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! Jack Thanks for not discussing it here. I doubt anyone would be interested.

11-20-2010, 09:16 PM	#3
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	Franky, I could not navigate on your Flickr page, but it could just be me :-) However, I gather from your comment that you used ISO 400 and pushed it 3 stops to be the equivalent of using ISO 12800.. If so, your math is off. 400/800/1600/3200/6400/12800.

11-20-2010, 09:31 PM	#4
secateurs Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Adelaide, Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 250	Originally posted by enoeske Thanks for not discussing it here. I doubt anyone would be interested. Ouch! Harsh! Actually, i disagree. There is actually a setting in the camera which will automatically underexpose for you, because shadows are much easier to correct than blown highlights in the K-5. The setting is called "Highlight Correction". There is also talk about circumventing high-ISO low level NR by shooting underexposed at 1600 and pushing. Talk to JohnBee about it.

11-20-2010, 10:15 PM	#5
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546 Original Poster	@SpecialK: It was pushed 3.4 stops according to my photo program to get to an equivalent luminance level of the ISO12800 shot. This was just a confirmation for me of what JeffJS had already discovered when he pushed his dog shot 10 stops or so and still got a very usable image. No way I could have done this with my K20.

11-20-2010, 11:10 PM	#6
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by jbinpg @SpecialK: It was pushed 3.4 stops according to my photo program to get to an equivalent luminance level of the ISO12800 shot. This was just a confirmation for me of what JeffJS had already discovered when he pushed his dog shot 10 stops or so and still got a very usable image. No way I could have done this with my K20. It was a total of about 4 stops .. Glad to see it confirmed though..

11-21-2010, 12:58 AM	#7
nulla Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 1,560	Originally posted by secateurs Ouch! Harsh! Actually, i disagree. There is actually a setting in the camera which will automatically underexpose for you, because shadows are much easier to correct than blown highlights in the K-5. The setting is called "Highlight Correction". There is also talk about circumventing high-ISO low level NR by shooting underexposed at 1600 and pushing. Talk to JohnBee about it. Thats correct... but I think it also sets your ISO to min 200

11-21-2010, 05:03 AM	#8
secateurs Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Adelaide, Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 250	Originally posted by nulla Thats correct... but I think it also sets your ISO to min 200 Actually, it sets the min to 160, because in reality, at ISO 160 it is shooting a shot at ISO 80, 1 stop underexposed, and pushing it in-camera. This will make the most of the increased dynamic range of ISO 80.