Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-19-2011, 03:15 PM   #46
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 581
No. Deliberately underexposing crap photos by 4 stops to boost in post to say "WOW" is not remotely useful for me. I have enough headroom out of my existing bodies to allow me to do that, if required.

Never have I thought to myself, "Jeez, if only I had a camera body that let me boost shadows incase I underexpose my shots by four stops". This isn't a slur on the K-5 in the slightest or any of the other cameras that use the same sensor, although "multiple stop underexposures" seem to be most popular here.

04-19-2011, 04:01 PM   #47
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 672
This thread went from zero to stupid pretty quickly.
04-19-2011, 05:11 PM   #48
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
QuoteOriginally posted by Big G Quote
No. Deliberately underexposing crap photos by 4 stops to boost in post to say "WOW" is not remotely useful for me. I have enough headroom out of my existing bodies to allow me to do that, if required.

Never have I thought to myself, "Jeez, if only I had a camera body that let me boost shadows incase I underexpose my shots by four stops". This isn't a slur on the K-5 in the slightest or any of the other cameras that use the same sensor, although "multiple stop underexposures" seem to be most popular here.
It's a simple controlled situation to show recovering shadows, while setting up a more complicated situation with lighting ratios to show the exact same thing.

The latter comes up a lot such as the example I showed, but is harder to set up. Again, both show the same thing. Crap is irrelevant, how much is underexposed is irrelevant. But it tells more than just graphs because you see the contrast, color, sharpness, noise and IQ as an image.

You said it isn't a bad thing, said you've never had a problem with it: so why chastise this test when it shows exactly what you admit to doing? Is it just because the source image isn't as good as something you took? Or are you are unable to make the connection from the test to dodging one important part of an otherwise well exposed picture?

You won't have enough headroom if you start to increase the ISO (something that may not be relevant to you, but is to many others): the K-5 will retain that ability at higher ISOs more-so than whatever you use. However, I think you're right in the sense that many people won't actually need this kind of headroom and are unnecessarily drooling over it.

Nevertheless, this is far from the "I took one picture accidentally 4 stops underexposed and look how great it came out!" which you seem to be making it out to be from one word in the title.

Last edited by Eruditass; 04-19-2011 at 05:41 PM.
04-19-2011, 06:12 PM   #49
Veteran Member
timh's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wales
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 445
QuoteOriginally posted by Big G Quote
It's been done, discussed and analysed to the n'th degree.
While of course your novel innovation of "second person posting in first person's thread to say that he/she doesn't like it" is entirely original. Patent it quick, that's my advice.

04-19-2011, 07:34 PM   #50
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
I too would like to see this.
Fortunately... I don't do enough flash work to warrant being bothered by it. But the thought had crossed my mind during recent testing.

Another thing I'd like to see if the option to toggle the AF assist beam via button. Because there are times when the AF module just doesn't seem to lock in semi-low light conditions, and so that might prove to be a quick fix in cases such as those.

Does anyone know if there is an official request list going out to Pentax from the forums with respect to FW updates?
I have made a personal request to PentaxImaging Support to have this looked into. I have not heard back from them in over a week.
04-20-2011, 03:02 AM   #51
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Durban, South Africa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,051
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
I have made a personal request to PentaxImaging Support to have this looked into. I have not heard back from them in over a week.
You would have thought that with the release of the K20D, K7 and now the uber K5 that "Flash" and unassisted low light focusing problems would be a thing of the past.

The Nikon D7000 does this with consummate ease, I would expect the K5 which is touted by the forum as giving Nikon users a feeling of jealousy, to be at the same level??
04-20-2011, 03:37 AM   #52
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,938
QuoteOriginally posted by dylansalt Quote
You would have thought that with the release of the K20D, K7 and now the uber K5 that "Flash" and unassisted low light focusing problems would be a thing of the past.

The Nikon D7000 does this with consummate ease, I would expect the K5 which is touted by the forum as giving Nikon users a feeling of jealousy, to be at the same level??
I think the light levels they are talking about here are low enough that the D7000 would struggle as well.

The D7000 is a nice a camera as is the K5. Why would the K5 being nice make D7000 users jealous? The Pentax system has its strong points and its weak points, but certainly the people who choose to use it are, in general, happy with it. What's wrong with them saying so?
04-20-2011, 04:09 AM   #53
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
QuoteOriginally posted by claudioNC Quote
Hi, I am the author of the comparison tests posted in Flickr for Pentax K5, Canon 5DII and 550D.

The purpose of this test, as explained in the roll-on appearing menu, is not to determine which of the 2 cameras offer higher resolution in normal conditions, but only to show the dynamic capability.
In that test I have used the 200 ISO setting only using the over-under exposition stress metodology that says more than a thousand words.

A camera with such a large dynamic range can be useful to everyone not just those who photograph landscapes! Here Pentax K5 at today win by a wide margin over all currently on the market, except the Nikon D7000 we probably could put in second place, but very close to the K5.

The Canon 5DII, with good lenses, I am almost sure, offer more detailed images, and so, no surprise here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I make large panoramic images, everyone can take a look at Claudio Costerni Now, also with Gigapixel resolution coming from hundreds of stitched pics and so the small difference in resolution, for me, is not the more important thing.
And anyway even less large images, almost always, come from the composition of multiple images, even just a dozen and have a detailed poster resolution.

In other pages, there in Flickr, I have posted also a comparison between the K5 and Canon 550D, please go to see it, but the results are similar.
One page is this, but there are also other ones:
Pentax K5 vs Canon 550D - Collage 02 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

In my opinion the nice K5 miss at least 3 important things to be almost a perfect photographic tool:

1. Live view with an effective resolution, the resolution in pixels that stated by the manufacturer.
It is very difficult to focus precisely because the close view with the zoom function does not show all the points of the sensor, it is like an interpolation apparence, a preview that makes the point of focus very uncertain because of the confused details.
The recent Canon, Nikon, Sony and Panasonic are a lot better here.

2. Greater speed in responding to some menu commands.
For example, there is an annoying delay between pressing the buttons to select-confirm-delete the photo and the actual completion of each step.
You always have the temptation to re-press certain commands because they are too out of sync with representation/execution on the menu screen.

On the other hand has an excellent capacity for continuous shooting with a very large buffer memory and, with faster memory cards as SanDisk Extreme 30MB/s, a very good recording speed.

3. Last thing, the K5 is not stellar of ergonomic, as someone say.
The buttons are too small for a camera designed for use even in difficult conditions.
With cold fingers that become insensitive or worse with, even light gloves the use becomes very uncertain and uncomfortable.
The small jack port for remote control is placed on the right, next to the rubber handle: absolutely wrong, stupid position.

For those who want to leave the wireless receiver on the slide of the flash and connected with the cable to the camera remote port, has to endure discomfort in the handle with the protrusion of the connector: this is absurd!

Best Regards ,
Claudio
Thanks for all the work Claudio, reputation points given

NaCl(one of these days I will have this camera)H2O

04-20-2011, 04:48 PM - 1 Like   #54
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Big G Quote
No. Deliberately underexposing crap photos by 4 stops to boost in post to say "WOW" is not remotely useful for me. I have enough headroom out of my existing bodies to allow me to do that, if required.

Never have I thought to myself, "Jeez, if only I had a camera body that let me boost shadows incase I underexpose my shots by four stops". This isn't a slur on the K-5 in the slightest or any of the other cameras that use the same sensor, although "multiple stop underexposures" seem to be most popular here.

You have completely missed the point. A camera that can save grossly underesposed images is a camera that can capture a scene with larger dynamic range. Capturing a scenes dynamic range has been the biggest technical obstacle for for photography since day one.
04-20-2011, 05:15 PM   #55
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Camporosso
Posts: 7
K5: the new chimical digital

Hello!

I say thanks to everyone for the warmth and the interest it has aroused my stress test.
I see that has not only stressed the files of my K5, but also someone on the forum.
It is normal that everyone can have his idea, but it would be sometimes more useful to clear the mind of preconceptions and try to think more.

I can not forget all the experiences I had with various digital starting before 2000.

Probably the worst I've had were the Sigma SD10 and, worse, the Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n, for various reasons.
This camera, with the beauty of 14 MP, at that time, in 2004, has reached this record of resolution, displacing all except Canon, but he also collected other disastrous records as those that have used it, well know.

I am convinced that this new K5, together with the D7000 and D5100 are the founders of new digital cameras that for capacity of the sensor and of electronics that supports him, not only reach but exceed the film cameras, loaded with the best film ever produced.
I expect an imminent counter-move with the next generation of Canon.
I am curious to see what will have been able to do without using Sony sensors, sensors that, I think, have both the Pentax K5 and Nikon D7000/D5100.
I also expects that Sigma is finally able to give birth soon his SD1 with a Foveon and appropriate electronics.
Go Sigma!

For several years, I go on the mountains and always carry with me, and I use regularly, a good carbon tripod tripod with the system "Ultimate-Pro Omni-Pivot" Really Right Stuff, (California), not because my hands are trembling, but because I could not do what I do without this, with no major impact on the final quality.
Sometimes I reduce the weight by not putting the rope with the self-insurance and the safety helmet in the backpack, but the panoramic head and the tripod are always with me.
Usually I make 3 frames exposures bracketing, and sometimes 5 or more if needed.
Each multi-frame is only one piece of that puzzle that will become a much bigger view, wider, better exposed more rich in detail even in shadows, but only if I want.
Not one of those horrible HDR effects that like viruses are invading the web.

Do not think to something very long and narrow, more usable for technical information, instead of nice to be observed: they can also be square or a normal screen format, but with exceptionally high resolution.
It is a long and tiring work, but at the end, for the man who has patience and time, rewarding for the results that offers.

Until two months ago I used with satisfaction the excellent Canon 5DII together with excellent Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Nikon, Samyang, new Zeiss and old Contax-Zeiss lenses.
Yet now I put them to rest for some time.

Now with the Pentax K5 I am no longer obliged to do always at least 3 shots auto bracket (lower limit imposed by the Canon and all or nearly all the others), but I can only do 2 or often 1 shot only.
Instead of producing, for example, 30 or 300 shots for a panoramic, now with the K5 I can limit myself to 20 or 200 or even 10 or 100 single shots.
This translates into less work, less time spent on the spot and less time in the studio with the computer.

If something moves quickly while shooting, (clouds, grass, tree branches, a glider ... or a plane chasing an alien spaceship) also a fast bracketing produces images that are not perfectly overlapping and therefore shaded and/or double elements, then you should only hope to remove it manually, as an artisan restorer, in case the software is not able to do it automatically, and often is not able to do it!

Sometimes I myself have given up and I avoided to merge the 3 images of the group (or only 2, eliminating 1) because it was near impossible to do it: think to the dense texture of the swaying branches of a tree, taken from near!

With the K5 often this become redundant or unnecessary and so I do not have to worry often about the multi shot overlapping problem, but only that between adjacent frames, and this is no negligible, is a good progress.

Sometimes a strong wind blows over the mountains and even a good tripod is not stable enough, vibrating under wind pressure shakes the camera.
I don't carry with me the quick-setting cement, also knowing that would help to make things more stable.

Do you understand what it means to take multi pictures in these conditions, with medium or long focal length lenses, with polarizer filter, not with f 1:1 and with low light near and after sunset?

So imagine how much more operational reserve can we have with the K5, without necessarily using high ISO, with the plus of a well stabilized sensor, with a relative immunity to digital noise in the area to the left of the histogram.
This is an immunity never appeared before!

Now, if I underexpose of 3, 4 stops and even more, if needed, in order to avoid irreparable shaked pictures, I have much more chance to come back home with good or very good ones.

Underexposing intentionally I increase my views and ... those of someone else's!
At least I hope so.
These are only some examples, you can find many others, along the way.

Please, think that english is not my first language, I am italian, and so is not so easy and fast for me do a good replay.

All the best with K5,
Claudio
2011-04-21
04-20-2011, 05:20 PM   #56
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,938
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You have completely missed the point. A camera that can save grossly underesposed images is a camera that can capture a scene with larger dynamic range. Capturing a scenes dynamic range has been the biggest technical obstacle for for photography since day one.
Exactly. This is why Ansel Adams used the zone system, why landscape photographers still, often gravitate toward medium format and larger formats. The idea that adding dynamic range is simply to save under exposed photos is silly (although it can save them).
04-21-2011, 09:09 AM   #57
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 67
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You have completely missed the point. A camera that can save grossly underesposed images is a camera that can capture a scene with larger dynamic range. Capturing a scenes dynamic range has been the biggest technical obstacle for for photography since day one.
Well said. Reputation points added.
04-21-2011, 09:44 AM - 1 Like   #58
Pentaxian
Designosophy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Northeast Philadelphia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,094
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You have completely missed the point. A camera that can save grossly underesposed images is a camera that can capture a scene with larger dynamic range. Capturing a scenes dynamic range has been the biggest technical obstacle for for photography since day one.
Definitely. It is of great value to be able to underexpose a contrasty scene in order to maximize highlight details, and then boost the shadows in PP without eliciting tons of noise. Having moved from a K-x to a K-7, I can say this from experience. At this point, I am very close to selling some audio equipment and my K-7 to buy a K-5.
04-21-2011, 10:06 AM   #59
Pentaxian
emalvick's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Davis, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,466
I actually appreciate the post as I just purchased a K5 that will arrive today to replace my K10d. I hadn't really thought of replacing it until a recent vacation at Carlsbad Caverns where I was constantly fighting dynamic range issues (as one would expect in a cavern) as well as other locations on my trip.

I am also an amature photographer. It is a hobby for me, but a hobby I take seriously. 3 years ago, I purchased my first DSLR (the K10d) because I felt it and Pentax offered the most to a hobbyist like myself. The reality is, I would probably be happy forever with that camera (and I'll keep it), but I have my flaws, and like many hobbyists I find certain situations more challenging than a professional might.

While I've read many reviews and discussions, it is an example like we've seen here that convinces me most that I've made the right decision in buying a K5. It isn't that I will ever purposely take a shot at EV-4 or even EV-2, but it is nice to know that:

1) I can make some mistakes and recover from them
2) I can quit fiddling with exposure to get the perfect exposure, which I often do now with my K10d, with the knowledge that certain elements will be recoverable.

I often find I am taking multiple shots just for the purpose of exposure control (blown out highlights are underexposed regions) and perhaps now I can concentrate on the best composure (which I neglect too much as a crutch).

On a side note, I don't care that much what the Canon does. I don't sell photos, and can't justify the money it would take to get into Canon or Nikon. I can see that they are good brands, but my personal investment was in Pentax and I am sticking with it.

Afterall, in the end, the image means more than the instrument that took it, and for a lowly amature like myself, I am happy to see that the K-5 will give me the best image for my dollar.
04-21-2011, 10:29 AM   #60
Veteran Member
kcobain1992's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,409
OK, I have read the topic almost throughout, now I have a picture taken with the K-r (I know it's not K-5, but things shouldn't be that different), that is overexposed, I don't know by how much, but if you say that so much detail can be recovered, then please tell me what modifications should I do to mine. Also, is shooting RAW absolutely necessary? I have only a JPEG version of the image.
Attached Images
 
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
5d, camera, dslr, ii, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Did I go insane or is this reasonable? Chaos_Realm Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 21 04-20-2011 12:54 PM
K-5... Wow wow wow wow wow!! Hugely impressive. 65535 Pentax K-5 85 11-08-2010 08:45 PM
INSANE! alaskaguy Post Your Photos! 6 03-10-2010 06:37 PM
Help me! I'm going insane SylBer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 41 01-29-2010 07:28 AM
Absolutely Insane Bluebird navcom Post Your Photos! 11 06-18-2009 09:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top