[jstevewhite]

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.

Perhaps you've noticed that this discussion has primarily been about pulling detail out of underexposed images. There's a reason for that. That's because once your exposure pegs the sensor, all information is lost, and it cannot be recovered because it's not recorded to begin with. So the reason the underexposure recovery of the k-5 is so important is that we can underexpose the overall scene so that the highlights are not blown out. This allows us to record the most information from the scene.

If all you have is a jpg, and it looks like that, chances are you aren't going to be able to recover much information from the highlights.

[vladimiroltean]

So this discution is not of much interest indeed

[Designosophy]

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.

If you had taken that photo using RAW, you would be able to recover some areas that are blown out (not all, I would venture). But if you shoot in JPEG, it doesn't matter what camera you use. Blown out areas are gone forever. The moral of the story: Shoot in RAW for the best results. You can shoot RAW + JPEG if you want to have JPEGs available immediately, but this can slow down your shooting.

[vladimiroltean]

But can a beginner like me get better results processing raw files myself? I mean, I don't even know how to open them I think that's another part of the story.

[jstevewhite]

But can a beginner like me get better results processing raw files myself? I mean, I don't even know how to open them I think that's another part of the story.

Photography is a learning experience.

[philbaum]

Mucho thanks to crossover37 and +1rep. very much appreciated your presentation.

I'm kind of annoyed with my K5. I used to be able to auto delete any badly underexposed pictures - now I have to be sure its not a subject worth keeping - not so auto a decision anymore. Dang.

What's this nonsense about needing a specific camera to sell photos? I sold crappy pictures with my K10 the second year i had it, I sold slightly less crappy pictures with my K20 (I was one of less than a dozen artists (out of the original 240 that applied) that sold an item at a Feb. all-state juried art show). There are lots of stellar qualities in the K5 that will enhance one's abilities to sell photos with it - if desired. Frankly, its never been any camera holding me back, rather my own slightly less crappy skills.

I live in a small town area and one of the local playhouses is delighted to let me (with others) take photos for decoratve and media purposes Its always fun to see new photographers come into the playhouse, then watch the lights guy turn down the house lights, turn up the spotlights, apply a few gel filtered lights, and watch the person's face get an anxious look as the preview images turn to blinkies.

With the K5, i'm just getting a whole lot less clipped highlights in the theatre than with my previous cameras. At first i thought it was because i was using it with -1 to -2 ev, but even without that, i'm not getting near the exposure problems. Whatever is helping the K5, its much appreciated - thank you Pentax!

[jstevewhite]

Mucho thanks to crossover37 and +1rep. very much appreciated your presentation.

I'm kind of annoyed with my K5. I used to be able to auto delete any badly underexposed pictures - now I have to be sure its not a subject worth keeping - not so auto a decision anymore. Dang.

What's this nonsense about needing a specific camera to sell photos? I sold crappy pictures with my K10 the second year i had it, I sold slightly less crappy pictures with my K20 (I was one of less than a dozen artists (out of the original 240 that applied) that sold an item at a Feb. all-state juried art show). There are lots of stellar qualities in the K5 that will enhance one's abilities to sell photos with it - if desired. Frankly, its never been any camera holding me back, rather my own slightly less crappy skills.

I think they're talking about the fact that some stock houses won't accept images from anything but CaNikon.

[Ash]

As for image quality, no doubt the K-5 is showing how much it can retain detail to compare favourably with a higher resolution FF camera. But IQ alone isn't the only issue between these two. That of course doesn't appease the stock image bank owners...

[30v iPentax]

Jos itse joutuisin miettimään Pentax tai joku muu romu ottasin sen romun. Eihän minulla olisi silloin kun apinan aivot. Nyt, kun ei tarvitse miettiä tarpeeni ja tietämykseni on niin vahva, että valitsen K-5 ilman arpajaisia.

[gostwick]

Jos itse joutuisin miettimään Pentax tai joku muu romu ottasin sen romun. Eihän minulla olisi silloin kun apinan aivot. Nyt, kun ei tarvitse miettiä tarpeeni ja tietämykseni on niin vahva, että valitsen K-5 ilman arpajaisia.

I agree with you. You put it very clearly.

[Schraubstock]

These translations are killing me

[Rupert]

I agree with you. You put it very clearly.

I enjoy them too...but at least he is trying and he is on the right track, gotta love that!

Best Regards!

[Rupert]

But can a beginner like me get better results processing raw files myself? I mean, I don't even know how to open them I think that's another part of the story.

I am not the one to ask really, I am not a Pro Processor by any means, but I can dabble around pretty well. If you are not shooting in Raw, you are missing a great part of the shooting experience, and no one wants that. Mail me if you are interested in some simple lessons on Raw Conversions and I will give you some simple advice to get you started.
Best Regards!

[RyanW]

So we've seen that the K5 and others using the same sensor can pull up underexposed parts of the image quite well.

35mm Film has a larger DR than Digital 35mm or Crop, correct? I've seen scans of film turned into jpg that then show a larger DR than digital is capable. At what level of DR will out of camera digital files start to capture the range seen in film at a SINGLE ev?

The ability to recover is nice, but wouldn't it be nice not to have to recover at all?

For example the other evening I took a shot of a church with some houses in front and a sunset behind the church. With my eye, I could clearly see detail in the houses and in the sky. Yet with digital I get to pick which one I want to see. The current working theory seems to be expose for the bright one and pull up the dark. I'm left thinking film would have had less of a problem capturing a scene like that. Am I wrong?

Thanks

[vladimiroltean]

As far as my film shooting experience goes, on negative film you would just need to be sure that you expose the shadows well, because the dynamic range will handle the rest of the image micely.
Negative film can accept many stops of overexposure, but underexposure looks quite bad in my personal experience.