K5 and Dynamic Range

deadwolfbones · 08-03-2011, 07:40 AM

To echo what others said, the K-5 has a lot more range in the shadows than it does in highlights. If anything, you want to underexpose slightly with this camera, not overexpose. You can see this in action in the K-5 vs. 7D head-to-head review on this site.

**DAZ** · 08-03-2011, 07:42 AM

For almost all of the history of photography no display method has been able to display the entire dynamic range. The captured image has always need to be compressed to display the image.

DAZ

Rupert · 08-03-2011, 08:37 AM

I am not a technician, but I do notice that the range is much improved. Not questioning the cause, but how much of this might have to do with better metering? I see a huge improvement in metering, do you? My shots come out better to start with as far as being more even.
Regards!

northcoastgreg · 08-03-2011, 07:36 PM - **1 Like**

As others have explained, it's all about capturing scenes with extensive dynamic range: for example, a bright sky combined with very dark shadows. In the following image I had bright sky in the corner. The sun was right behind the rock on the right and the dynamic range was pretty extreme between the bright sky and the dark side of the rock. In the past, I might have tried HDR or ND grad filter, but I couldn't use HDR because of the moving surf and an ND grad filter is difficult to use with a fisheye lens. So I either had to capture this in the camera or forget about it. This is what the image looks like straight out of the camera:

The foreground is very dark, the sky almost too bright. With any other digital camera I've used, you would have serious grain problems, and loss of detail, if you tried to bring back the foreground to normal levels. Not so with the k-5. All the information is there, in the raw file; it just needs to be coaxed back to life in a raw converter like Adobe's Lightroom:

Incidentally, since getting the K-5, I've stopped doing HDRs. Really no need for it any more.

Anthony Lee · 08-03-2011, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by northcoastgreg

As others have explained, it's all about capturing scenes with extensive dynamic range: for example, a bright sky combined with very dark shadows. In the following image I had bright sky in the corner. The sun was right behind the rock on the right and the dynamic range was pretty extreme between the bright sky and the dark side of the rock. In the past, I might have tried HDR or ND grad filter, but I couldn't use HDR because of the moving surf and an ND grad filter is difficult to use with a fisheye lens. So I either had to capture this in the camera or forget about it. This is what the image looks like straight out of the camera:

The foreground is very dark, the sky almost too bright. With any other digital camera I've used, you would have serious grain problems, and loss of detail, if you tried to bring back the foreground to normal levels. Not so with the k-5. All the information is there, in the raw file; it just needs to be coaxed back to life in a raw converter like Adobe's Lightroom:

Incidentally, since getting the K-5, I've stopped doing HDRs. Really no need for it any more.

Good example. Is it better to meter the sky and bring back the foreground or meter the foreground and bring back the sky?

**DAZ** · 08-03-2011, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by Anthony Lee

Good example. Is it better to meter the sky and bring back the foreground or meter the foreground and bring back the sky?

You can't real recover if you clip so you expose for the brightest part of the scene that you want to keep. If you meter for the sky (and not adjust) the sky will be 18% gray and you will loose some of you DR in the sky. To get as much of the DR as you can you will have to expose the sky a little brighter (don't over do it) and then in PP pull the bright sky down a little and the dark part up as much as you can get with out loose it.

DAZ

**jbinpg** · 08-03-2011, 08:38 PM

Actually, Greg, I prefer the original over the pp'ed one due to the total lack of contrast in the massaged one. Somewhere in between would be perfect.

Jack

**Schraubstock** · 08-03-2011, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by northcoastgreg

As others have explained, it's all about capturing scenes with extensive dynamic range: for example, a bright sky combined with very dark shadows. In the following image I had bright sky in the corner. The sun was right behind the rock on the right and the dynamic range was pretty extreme between the bright sky and the dark side of the rock. In the past, I might have tried HDR or ND grad filter, but I couldn't use HDR because of the moving surf and an ND grad filter is difficult to use with a fisheye lens. So I either had to capture this in the camera or forget about it. This is what the image looks like straight out of the camera:

The foreground is very dark, the sky almost too bright. With any other digital camera I've used, you would have serious grain problems, and loss of detail, if you tried to bring back the foreground to normal levels. Not so with the k-5. All the information is there, in the raw file; it just needs to be coaxed back to life in a raw converter like Adobe's Lightroom:

Incidentally, since getting the K-5, I've stopped doing HDRs. Really no need for it any more.

Hi
As a demonstration of what we are discussing here, namely dynamic range, it is a brilliant example. I am sure this is what the poster had in mind.

To PP the image so it is a keeper for the album I would have preferred the outcome to look something like this (my personal taste):

Greetings

**jbinpg** · 08-03-2011, 11:17 PM

Yep, beautiful job!

dmort · 08-04-2011, 04:25 AM

That's some great work! In light room, when editing raw, how do you properly expose the rocks without blowing out the sky? I know you can do that in Photoshop...

deadwolfbones · 08-04-2011, 07:16 AM

You can use the GND tool to selectively brighten part of the image, and also the "fill light" slider. A more effective way is probably creating masks in photoshop, but that takes more time.

dmort · 08-04-2011, 01:38 PM

I was going to say, I thought that you most effectively could use masks. I guess the GND tool is new to lightroom 3? i haven't spent too much time figuring out what is new between LR2 and LR3. Good tip.

starstuff · 08-04-2011, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by dosdan

If the scene lighting is difficult i.e. sunset, with this sensor it's much better to use -0.5EV to -1 EVcomp, to ensure the highlights are not blown at all.

Dan.

I've found this depends to some extent on the lens. My DA 21mm Ltd (pancake) does much better at -0.5EV across the board, but my recently acquired DA 40mm Ltd (pancake) seems to like 0.

**Schraubstock** · 08-04-2011, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by dmort

I was going to say, I thought that you most effectively could use masks. I guess the GND tool is new to lightroom 3? i haven't spent too much time figuring out what is new between LR2 and LR3. Good tip.

Hi
The correction I did is not optimal but was only an indication of what can be done.
It can never be optimal working with an 8bit highly compressed JPG image. You can see this in the artifacts where rock meets sky. You would be blown away by the quality of this image had it been a RAW file correction.

I do not use LR, but in PShop I use layers and curves. RAW file manipulation I do in Bibble Pro and OLONEO.

Greetings

deadwolfbones · 08-04-2011, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by dmort

I was going to say, I thought that you most effectively could use masks. I guess the GND tool is new to lightroom 3? i haven't spent too much time figuring out what is new between LR2 and LR3. Good tip.

Pretty sure the GND was also there in LR2. The actual name is "Graduated Filter"... it's 2nd from right on the toolbar below the histogram.

08-03-2011, 10:39 PM	#23
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Originally posted by northcoastgreg As others have explained, it's all about capturing scenes with extensive dynamic range: for example, a bright sky combined with very dark shadows. In the following image I had bright sky in the corner. The sun was right behind the rock on the right and the dynamic range was pretty extreme between the bright sky and the dark side of the rock. In the past, I might have tried HDR or ND grad filter, but I couldn't use HDR because of the moving surf and an ND grad filter is difficult to use with a fisheye lens. So I either had to capture this in the camera or forget about it. This is what the image looks like straight out of the camera: The foreground is very dark, the sky almost too bright. With any other digital camera I've used, you would have serious grain problems, and loss of detail, if you tried to bring back the foreground to normal levels. Not so with the k-5. All the information is there, in the raw file; it just needs to be coaxed back to life in a raw converter like Adobe's Lightroom: Incidentally, since getting the K-5, I've stopped doing HDRs. Really no need for it any more. Hi As a demonstration of what we are discussing here, namely dynamic range, it is a brilliant example. I am sure this is what the poster had in mind. To PP the image so it is a keeper for the album I would have preferred the outcome to look something like this (my personal taste): Greetings Last edited by Schraubstock; 10-31-2011 at 07:14 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
645D dynamic range	Pål Jensen	Pentax Medium Format	9	04-30-2010 09:00 AM
Dynamic Range on the K-x	Shahmatt	Pentax DSLR Discussion	33	04-22-2010 03:51 PM
K-7 and below average dynamic range	harleynitelite	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	9	01-18-2010 01:05 AM
Pentax Dynamic Range	LeDave	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	11-06-2009 12:29 PM
High Dynamic Range	ve2vfd	General Talk	2	09-17-2009 04:03 PM

08-03-2011, 07:40 AM	#16
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	To echo what others said, the K-5 has a lot more range in the shadows than it does in highlights. If anything, you want to underexpose slightly with this camera, not overexpose. You can see this in action in the K-5 vs. 7D head-to-head review on this site.

08-03-2011, 07:42 AM	#17
DAZ Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Everett, WA USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 744	For almost all of the history of photography no display method has been able to display the entire dynamic range. The captured image has always need to be compressed to display the image. DAZ

08-03-2011, 08:37 AM	#18
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	I am not a technician, but I do notice that the range is much improved. Not questioning the cause, but how much of this might have to do with better metering? I see a huge improvement in metering, do you? My shots come out better to start with as far as being more even. Regards!

08-03-2011, 07:36 PM - 1 Like	#19
northcoastgreg Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,173	As others have explained, it's all about capturing scenes with extensive dynamic range: for example, a bright sky combined with very dark shadows. In the following image I had bright sky in the corner. The sun was right behind the rock on the right and the dynamic range was pretty extreme between the bright sky and the dark side of the rock. In the past, I might have tried HDR or ND grad filter, but I couldn't use HDR because of the moving surf and an ND grad filter is difficult to use with a fisheye lens. So I either had to capture this in the camera or forget about it. This is what the image looks like straight out of the camera: The foreground is very dark, the sky almost too bright. With any other digital camera I've used, you would have serious grain problems, and loss of detail, if you tried to bring back the foreground to normal levels. Not so with the k-5. All the information is there, in the raw file; it just needs to be coaxed back to life in a raw converter like Adobe's Lightroom: Incidentally, since getting the K-5, I've stopped doing HDRs. Really no need for it any more.

08-03-2011, 08:05 PM	#20
Anthony Lee Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: S E Asia Posts: 31	Originally posted by northcoastgreg As others have explained, it's all about capturing scenes with extensive dynamic range: for example, a bright sky combined with very dark shadows. In the following image I had bright sky in the corner. The sun was right behind the rock on the right and the dynamic range was pretty extreme between the bright sky and the dark side of the rock. In the past, I might have tried HDR or ND grad filter, but I couldn't use HDR because of the moving surf and an ND grad filter is difficult to use with a fisheye lens. So I either had to capture this in the camera or forget about it. This is what the image looks like straight out of the camera: The foreground is very dark, the sky almost too bright. With any other digital camera I've used, you would have serious grain problems, and loss of detail, if you tried to bring back the foreground to normal levels. Not so with the k-5. All the information is there, in the raw file; it just needs to be coaxed back to life in a raw converter like Adobe's Lightroom: Incidentally, since getting the K-5, I've stopped doing HDRs. Really no need for it any more. Good example. Is it better to meter the sky and bring back the foreground or meter the foreground and bring back the sky?

08-03-2011, 08:13 PM	#21
DAZ Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Everett, WA USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 744	Originally posted by Anthony Lee Good example. Is it better to meter the sky and bring back the foreground or meter the foreground and bring back the sky? You can't real recover if you clip so you expose for the brightest part of the scene that you want to keep. If you meter for the sky (and not adjust) the sky will be 18% gray and you will loose some of you DR in the sky. To get as much of the DR as you can you will have to expose the sky a little brighter (don't over do it) and then in PP pull the bright sky down a little and the dark part up as much as you can get with out loose it. DAZ

08-03-2011, 08:38 PM	#22
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546	Actually, Greg, I prefer the original over the pp'ed one due to the total lack of contrast in the massaged one. Somewhere in between would be perfect. Jack

08-03-2011, 11:17 PM	#24
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546	Yep, beautiful job!

08-04-2011, 04:25 AM	#25
dmort Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Bronx, NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 415 Original Poster	That's some great work! In light room, when editing raw, how do you properly expose the rocks without blowing out the sky? I know you can do that in Photoshop...

08-04-2011, 07:16 AM	#26
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	You can use the GND tool to selectively brighten part of the image, and also the "fill light" slider. A more effective way is probably creating masks in photoshop, but that takes more time.

08-04-2011, 01:38 PM	#27
dmort Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Bronx, NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 415 Original Poster	I was going to say, I thought that you most effectively could use masks. I guess the GND tool is new to lightroom 3? i haven't spent too much time figuring out what is new between LR2 and LR3. Good tip.

08-04-2011, 08:00 PM	#28
starstuff Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: San Francisco Posts: 57	Originally posted by dosdan If the scene lighting is difficult i.e. sunset, with this sensor it's much better to use -0.5EV to -1 EVcomp, to ensure the highlights are not blown at all. Dan. I've found this depends to some extent on the lens. My DA 21mm Ltd (pancake) does much better at -0.5EV across the board, but my recently acquired DA 40mm Ltd (pancake) seems to like 0.

08-04-2011, 08:52 PM	#29
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Originally posted by dmort I was going to say, I thought that you most effectively could use masks. I guess the GND tool is new to lightroom 3? i haven't spent too much time figuring out what is new between LR2 and LR3. Good tip. Hi The correction I did is not optimal but was only an indication of what can be done. It can never be optimal working with an 8bit highly compressed JPG image. You can see this in the artifacts where rock meets sky. You would be blown away by the quality of this image had it been a RAW file correction. I do not use LR, but in PShop I use layers and curves. RAW file manipulation I do in Bibble Pro and OLONEO. Greetings

08-04-2011, 09:57 PM	#30
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	Originally posted by dmort I was going to say, I thought that you most effectively could use masks. I guess the GND tool is new to lightroom 3? i haven't spent too much time figuring out what is new between LR2 and LR3. Good tip. Pretty sure the GND was also there in LR2. The actual name is "Graduated Filter"... it's 2nd from right on the toolbar below the histogram.