Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-18-2011, 04:56 PM - 1 Like   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 206
2000 photos later with my K5

Hi all,

Maybe this will be interesting to someone considering the K5 as a first DSLR, or just for someone considering a DSLR in general. Or, just amusing, and a chance to make fun of someone's picture attempts. If you want to just poke fun of the pics, you can skip it to a few sample pics that I have put up: http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259484@N04/sets/72157627801066209/

It's been a learning experience for me as this is my first DSLR - not only doing the lots of research before purchase, far more investigation into 'lens mumbo jumbo' (aka focal points, apertures, Tamron/Sigma/Pentax offerings, etc. ), and of course, trying to figure out not only 'what I thought i needed,' but also, how to hopefully, eventually, take some OK pictures, after a long time with point and shoot and a couple of bridge type cameras.

I've read the Kelby book, have started on Understanding Exposure, and am taking an online photography class along with my wife. 2k pictures and a few months later, it's interesting to note some things along the lines of 'what I thought' vs 'how things turned out.'

Initially, I'd expected to do a lot of landscape pictures, as this has been something I've done a lot of with other cameras through various travels, followed next by family pics.
I went ahead and started with the K5 + 18-55 WR kit lens, used SMC-A 50-f/1.7 and used SMC-A 70-210 f/4, Slinger bag, spare battery, and a second SD card (8GB + 16GB)
I wanted to have at least one WR lens in the kit, as the weather sealing was a consideration in purchasing the K5, and I've had a handful of weatherproof/waterproof/submersible cameras that I've put through the paces in the past.

So...in reality, I've found myself ignoring the 18-55mm to some extent. I can see it's use, but after a few trips to lakes, mountains, parks, and other places, I have used it a reasonable amount, but am constantly wanting more zoom in most cases. On the flip side, I love the manual 70-210mm. There are a few times that I've wanted to go wider, and of course times I've wanted to go longer, but I'm very happy I bought that lens for the princely sum of $75 or so. The DR and ISO performance on the K5 has made the constant f/4.0 pretty good and I've been pretty happy with some lower light shots. If I have the 18-55mm mounted, and have any inclination I'll 'need' or want the 70-210, or am close to choosing either lens, the 18-55 is removed, pretty quickly. Don't get me wrong, the 18-55 has taken some good (to/for me) pictures, and I really like the quick-shift capability - this is the way every modern lens should function, do what I want without changing switches, if I'm moving the focus then obviously I want to do it myself, right? The 18-55 feels pretty plastic-y in comparison to even other plastic lenses like a friend's Nikon, or the Tamron/Quantaray 70-300mm I finally picked up. It is light, though, so maybe I should be thankful for that.

I haven't as of yet put the 50mm to much use. I do expect that to change at some point, but as I'm not taking pictures every day nor in studio or constant oriented/sized spaces, I just haven't used it much, to date. The pictures I have taken with it I've been very happy with, and honestly pretty surprised by just how much light can be collected in mid-afternoon with a larger aperture lens, to the point of blowing out the picture.

The K5 has been great overall. Yeah, a bit worried about some of the misc problems, but no freezes or lockups, no problems, only twice did it 'concern me' - once i was using the green button in Av mode, and didn't realize I had been 'fiddling' with the aperture setting, so somewhat unexpectedly, i wound up with a several second exposure, while I was wondering where the 'click' was. Oops, it's good to pay attention. The other time, I don't remember exactly, but think it was after purchasing and inserting a new SD card for the first time, I wound up popping the battery out and back in for some reason. No actual issues. The few times I've handed the camera to someone to take a picture of my wife and I together - haven't gone so well yet, but it's possible that's entirely my fault, leaving it set to spot/single metering mode). I didn't realize actually until trying to fix some 'stranger taken pics' that the green mode will only produce jpegs...which is frustrating, as it gives less data to try to make a printable picture out of. I'd like an 'expert menu setting' to enable to override this behavior, although it makes complete sense for green/auto mode to default to jpg only.

I've yet to run down a battery, but have managed to fill the smaller SD card in a single day (shooting mostly RAW). The second battery is non-Pentax and came for 'free' with the package from Adorama, so I haven't needed it yet, but it's cheap insurance, and I'm glad I have it, as well as the second card. When the card filled up, we were out and about and in the middle of good evening light coming up, and nowhere near home or the car, so I'm also very glad for the second SD card - it can take some real time to delete 'enough' pictures to free up real amounts of space on a card via the K5s LCD, versus 10 seconds to just swap cards. I also shot RAW+JPEG for a brief time, but seeing the difference in adjustments able to be made, and committing to using Lightroom as the primary import/organization/touchup tool (vs picassa), there just isn't any real need for me for JPGs in addition to RAW. I'll usually have a laptop available when traveling, and don't generally want/need to hand a card off to someone for printing without review/PP, but someone else may need or want to do this, I suppose.

The camera bag - a Slinger by Adorama. Decent bag, and it has enough room for me. I think it's a good travel bag, as it can hold the K5 with longish zoom, plus likely another 4 or more lenses, plus misc gear - wipes, spare cards, batteries, wallet, etc. I haven't quite figured out how they intend for it to be worn - with a single strap that's adjustable, but without adjustable strap padding, it seems to sit a bit funny no matter how I wear it, which is usually on my left hip, with the strap going over my head resting on my right shoulder. For active/moving around usage, I think it's a bit too big for me. I'd like something a bit smaller for daily outings, probably use the slinger to carry 'everything' in transit, and then just pick what I really want to take along in a smaller bag. Suggestions welcome - I'd like to be able to carry the K5, 70-210, 18-55, the prime 50, spare battery, lens wipes, and perhaps a very small 'misc pocket.

Camera strap - The OE strap, for me, was just an exercise in annoyance. My wife likes it, but it drove me insane, especially with the 70-210 hanging off of it and moving around. Several of you posted some good answers in one of my first threads asking about straps, and I wound up going with a 'carry speed' rapid strap- it's basically an RS strap, has an extra optional strap that can 'connect' the front and back of the straps under your armpit, has the metal 'full mount' that goes onto the camera bottom, allowing a tripod to be used without unscrewing anything, and was roughly half the price of the RS via ebay and a US seller. I haven't used the 'optional strap' at this point, but it definitely helps to put the weight of the camera and lens where it belongs - off of your neck...have carried the K5 nearly all day long walking all over and hiking, and I really like this strap so far.

Surprises:
I thought I'd be using the 50mm or the 18-55 kit lens for portrait type pictures. Maybe I will at some point, but the 70-210 takes some great portrait type shots outdoors, anywhere from full body/head to toe(+), waist up, neck/face closeups, and the lens is long enough to be able to adjust your DOF to suit. I'm very happy with this lens.

Histograms/proper exposures/metering:
I spent a good amount of time reading on both subjects, and understand both, as well as sensor dynamic range limitations, etc..but that's not the same as doing it, let alone without much thought. I'm a long ways from looking at a scene, coming up with completely manual settings from the top of my head, and being anywhere in the ballpark. Histograms however, can be invaluable in Lightroom and in adjusting exposure, fill light, blacks, along with setting up the 'blinkies' just like in the K5 image review to show clipped regions. I'm generally using spot metering, and lately have been using exposure bracketing a fair amount, although I fairly consistently manage to either clip highlights or lose shadow detail in most images. Bracketing can help, but it's not magic, as for the most part it'll shift the histogram to the right or left, which may allow for a better starting point for PP, to clip/lose a bit less. If I had to guess offhand, I'd say regardless of mode I'm shooting in, probably close to 50% will have some clipping or shadow loss based on the image histogram. This is surprising sometimes, as I've shot something and felt I got the overall look/lighting level I wanted, but then see a fair amount of shadow detail lost. I'm thinking it's probably/maybe mostly down to my metering, as I do use the green button for a starting point in many cases...although it seems in program mode if I rely on the green button and then don't switch to fully manual, that it will still result in clipping at the high or low end..need more time to practice and play, I think.

Green button: This is just sheer goodness. It's not perfect (see end of histogram comments), but it's a great starting point. I find if I sometimes am using program mode, hit the green button, adjust what I want to (with the other param locked/moving in sync), and then use EV adjustment if I want to 'force' more or less exposure on an image. I have no idea if that's how it's intended to be used or not, but at least sometimes, it works. In a few cases with lower lighting outdoors, green button + program mode would result in at least 2 stops over-exposure in comparing what I was seeing visually in the current lighting vs what was displayed in the K5 LCD on after shot image review. Maybe it has to do with my metering, lack thereof sometimes, or using the 70-210 lens?

Lightroom adjustments:
LR is pretty nice. From a usability perspective, it definitely has a learning curve, and some things are sort of non-intuitive - crop and leave in original aspect ratio, now move the mouse crop window around. Oh, right, while all other options will lock the aspect ratio selected, for 'original' you need to click the lock, otherwise it's 'free form' aspect ratio. I haven't quite figured out how to saturate only specific color ranges, and in some places, it seems like the eyedropper will work only in the 'tool window' where I really want to sample a color from the image itself to let it populate the tool values in some cases. I haven't quite figured out if LR is deleting images from backup if I decide to delete the original image, but that's just poling around. Overall, LR is pretty nice, the heal and clone make it nice to not have to go into full PS for every shot of people/skin. I'm amazed at how much detail can come out of underexposed images, and the images that can be salvaged. I've got to spend more time playing with LR, but at least there are some decent videos out there, and when I'm trying to do something specific, you can usually find an answer via Google.
WB adjustments are pretty surprising. The short of it is the K5 for most of my shots seems to have an AWB of neutral to slightly warm, with mostly decent looks if you don't adjust the WB in LR for many shots. if you do, going from Daylight -> Cloudy -> Shade are all incrementally 'warmer' shots, so can be a quick 'fix' if your shots seem too neutral/cool. If your color range is somehow way off or you want to really play, you can always use the eye-dropper to pick your neutral shade from, but for at least 50% of my pictures, As Shot, Auto, or one of the 'warmth' settings (Daylight, Cloudy, Shade) seem to do the trick. Auto-tone is usually a good starting point, followed by some manual adjustment, or doing it fully manual - LR seems to tend towards the bright side of exposure adjustments, which I don't always want. The histogram with clipping/blinkies enabled is great to fine tune with.

Monitor vs laptop display calibration:
This is driving me insane. No colorimeter, but have done the usual online scale based calibration for both my IPS LCD, and the macbook pro hi res screen. My IPS panel consistently produces a warmer tone for the same image. I'm not positive yet how this equates into printing, but I do have concerns that some of my images may be too warm or too cold, depending on which LCD is closer to actually correct. Advice welcome - right now, I think I'll run through the calibrations I can do by eye once more, and see if I can pick up a colorimeter used at some point, possibly not too far off, or print a few images (I don't have a photo printer, would need to send off) then compare to both screens and adjust from there. If someone sees any really strong color/tone issues on the flickr link, please let me know which, and in which direction, as it may help me sort 'which display to trust more' when doing future adjustments.

More surprises:
I found myself taking far more pictures of friends and family than I expected. The 70-210 really is to 'blame' here, as it lends itself to a good range of perspectives. I have a good number of shoulders/neck up shots, some face only, some waist up, as well as full shot plus bigger DOF to include background details. And honestly, I found myself just taking more pictures of people than I expected - quite a few of friend's kids, and their expressions and activities, and some few random strangers. Buying the K5, I had expected people to comprise maybe 25% of the pictures, it's probably turned out to be 60%+ right now.

Macro - Something going into it I just didn't expect to care much about. Enter a few cool spider webs, colored stones, flowers - ok, so I'd now generally choose a lens with a macro mode than the same or similar lens without. I'm guessing the macro mode of the 70-210 isn't 'really,' but still learning about macro mode(s)/magnification, etc.

Manual focusing: This has been mixed. i've managed to get some action shots (moving boats, water skiing), in focus ok with the 70-210mm. I've gotten some pretty distant shots in good focus at larger apertures. Then again, I've also managed to miss what would have been some good people shots by being not quite in focus. The not quite in focus of course has also happened with the kit lens, but I'm improving hopefully in both areas. With an AF lens, I'm focusing on the face/eyes, then recompose and shoot. With the 70-210, I'm doing what I can to keep things focused properly, and usually successfully, but in lower or less than ideal lighting, it's sometimes hit and miss.

Things I'd do differently:
I can see why people go for the 18-135mm kit if they have the option.
I'd gladly replace the 18-55mm with an 18-< anything longer!! > and probably never use the 18-55 again at that point.
70mm is a bit long for an everyday lens, for me. 200/210mm is also a bit short for a lot of shots I've taken.
The 18-135 would definitely let me keep that 'one lens' on much more, but i can see the allure of the 18-250, 18-200, 60-250 etc lenses.
With the K5 higher ISO performance, it may well be 'good enough' to not spend the bigger $ to jump to an f/2.8 zoom, or at least for me.
I'm definitely going to be thinking about what makes sense to replace the 18-55 with, but there are a lot of options out there...if I had to do it over again today, with a few more $, I'd go with the 18-135mm in the kit. Failing that, I can see how the DA 55-300 would be very nice to have alongside the 18-55 or a 17-70mm.

On the long side, I picked up a closeout Quantaray branded Tamron LD (non DI) 70-300mm for peanuts, for two reasons - a. My wife really likes AF > MF. b. I'd like to be able to go longer than 210mm.
The lack of quick shift, and weird way to exit macro mode (just got it, so may be wrong here, but seems like you have to change back to mf mode to get it out of macro mode?)..well, right now, I like the 'feel' of the 70-210mm much more, and the lack of quick-shift is annoying, but we'll see how it goes. In the worst case, I should be able to sell it for ~$80-100 if I move on and up to a different longer lens in the future.

Things I'd like to get sorted:
My metering or whatever is causing me to lose detail or blow highlights in some shots, and reduce the number of those.
Get more perfectly/better focused shots.
Sort out the paths that make sense in the future as I do get some $ available for nicer lenses. Way too many options, and I don't want or need to exercise all of them. Maybe the answer is a decent 17-70 + a used Bigma, I really don't know. I'll spend some time with the 70-300mm now and see how I feel about it first, and decide where I feel 'lacking' the most, on the short or long end, in focal range/versatility, in quality/sharpness, or in both. I can see a pair of lenses and a prime as being reasonable 'walk-around' for me, but right now at least am thinking the 18-55 is just too short, and without some amount of overlapping focal distances on the zoom, it can be more lens swapping than I'd prefer. Maybe some more time will change my opinion there.
Take pics. Take more pics. Figure out what I did and didn't do right vs what I wanted to do. Hopefully learn something from it, and repeat.
Composition - learn and practice a lot more to try to get more 'interesting' shots via perspective of 'everyday things,'
Learn more LR and PS, how to bring out more saturation in specific colors, then wherever seems interesting.
Get the LCD(s) reliably calibrated to the point I'm confident in trusting the IPS panel colors.

That's it for now. I've got a lot to learn, but am having fun with the K5.
A handful of public pics..most of my favorites with the K5 so far are actually people shots, but those don't go public:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259484@N04/sets/72157627801066209/

If anyone sees any color/tone/neutral vs warmth issues with any of the linked pics, please let me know, as I'm still deciding which LCD to 'trust the most.'

10-18-2011, 05:36 PM   #2
Site Supporter
Ex Finn.'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Maryland.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,296
Sounds like you are a prime candidate for the DA* 60-250..
10-18-2011, 07:59 PM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 206
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ex Finn. Quote
Sounds like you are a prime candidate for the DA* 60-250..
It's fun spending someone else's cash, no?

My first thought - google pricing. Go into shock. Google canon and nikon 18-200s , and be somewhat annoyed over the price diff. Then think about it again.
I should have a year end bonus coming, and realistically, that's the time for a more substantial lens purchase, although I'm not positive 'how' substantial just yet.

Were the DA 55-300 WR (why not, pentax, really?) it would make it the next incremental step. The Pentax/Tamron 18-250 is discontinued, and wasn't WR - I'd really like one of the two main 'travel lenses' to be WR.
If the DA* were 18-135 vs 50-135, I'd be up for the $ to replace the kit 18-55 (and then some), then adding something like a used Sigma 150-400/500mm given some time.

Realistically, I could see spending the $ on a DA* 60-250 before I'd spend ~1k on a DA* 50-135.

I'm probably best off by paying attention to where I take most of the next few thousand pics (focal distance), and then go from there. There's something pretty compelling to me about a pair of decent lenses being the mainstay, with a small handful of 'specialty' lenses, with at least one of the two zooms being WR. I'm probably not alone on that one. I don't mind spending reasonable $ or saving up for a decent lens, but once those prices hit over $400 or so, I'd prefer to not wind up selling/replacing those with something else in a few months. The current set of lenses = no big deal, I'll break even or close enough on them.
10-18-2011, 10:37 PM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,547
rptguy - I don't use histograms in camera. I use the "blinkies" instead. I shoot only raw, so I have wiggle room as long as I only have red specks blinking at me (overexposed areas without detail) or yellow blinkies (underexposed) where I expect things to be black. If I have largish areas of overexposure, and they are not white billboards or bright clouds, I can make a quick correction. The blinkies are based on the jpeg rendition used for the LCD, so often they are not there when loaded into Lightroom or DxO.

On the other hand, being my usual klutzy self, I just ended up adding 2 stops in Lightroom after leaving the camera in spot meter mode. It all turned out OK because I was shooting raw, and had enough wiggle room with the exposure.

10-19-2011, 03:55 PM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 206
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
rptguy - I don't use histograms in camera. I use the "blinkies" instead. I shoot only raw, so I have wiggle room as long as I only have red specks blinking at me (overexposed areas without detail) or yellow blinkies (underexposed) where I expect things to be black. If I have largish areas of overexposure, and they are not white billboards or bright clouds, I can make a quick correction. The blinkies are based on the jpeg rendition used for the LCD, so often they are not there when loaded into Lightroom or DxO.

On the other hand, being my usual klutzy self, I just ended up adding 2 stops in Lightroom after leaving the camera in spot meter mode. It all turned out OK because I was shooting raw, and had enough wiggle room with the exposure.
I use the blinkies in the in camera image review as well, but amusingly, your last line is I think the culprit for most of my (fairly many) 'blown' images - leaving the camera on spot meter...and have wound up pushing the exposure far more than I'd expect to for a number of pictures, possibly as a direct result.

Are the histograms in image review not also based on the jpeg rendition (even if the jpeg image isn't saved off, like in only RAW mode)?
The historgram in image review does take up quite some space, I may try to disable it and only use the blinkies for a while..

In LR, I use both histogram and 'blinkies' in tandem, as at least for lost details and clipping highlights, they're fairly interchangeable. As I'm adjusting exposure, fill light, blacks, etc., I'll note the effect on the histogram, but use the blinkies to decide on how far I'm ok to push an image/if I'm ok with where I'm losing some detail, or not. I hope that makes sense? Of course, getting out of spot meter mode, I'm hoping to have far more shots that I'm not losing shadow details or clipping highlights (I currently have the preserve highlights setting enabled), but we'll see.
10-19-2011, 04:20 PM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: La Jolla, CA.
Posts: 262
Another novel under my belt.

When your are using spot metering, you are metering the lighter areas correct? Are you also obtaining a meter reading of the darker areas? Perhaps your scene's darker areas are exceeding the DR of the camera? If you obtain a reading of a lighter area and then meter the darker area in a scene and you are -5 stops, you will need to bracket exposures or use a flash. Depending on what you are shooting, you may also want to overexpose your shot by .5-1 stop. I am finding spot metering superior to evaluative, especially for shots with greater dynamic range.

Like you, I am also learning and am only about six months deep into photography so perhaps my "Advice" should be taken as a grain of salt.
10-19-2011, 04:32 PM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: La Jolla, CA.
Posts: 262
I also wanted to add that a few of your images seem a tad cold to me, but this can probably go either way depending upon who you ask.

In regard to the image to the dead tree with the dangling swing, where did you meter for that photograph?
10-19-2011, 04:38 PM - 2 Likes   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,547
QuoteOriginally posted by IIGQ4U Quote
Another novel under my belt.

When your are using spot metering, you are metering the lighter areas correct? Are you also obtaining a meter reading of the darker areas? Perhaps your scene's darker areas are exceeding the DR of the camera? If you obtain a reading of a lighter area and then meter the darker area in a scene and you are -5 stops, you will need to bracket exposures or use a flash. Depending on what you are shooting, you may also want to overexpose your shot by .5-1 stop. I am finding spot metering superior to evaluative, especially for shots with greater dynamic range.

Like you, I am also learning and am only about six months deep into photography so perhaps my "Advice" should be taken as a grain of salt.
Spot metering is almost an arcane art form. The one I learned within the last year or two on one or another list was to meter the brightest area in which I want detail, and add 2 stops to that. I can understand that system when spot metering, because it is exactly how I shoot in snow I meter the snow in Manual and add 2 stops. I am not absolutely certain of what in the scene is 18% grey, so trying to meter what is supposed to be perfect can be off.

I use the camera in Manual Exposure because I don't want the subject to change the settings. This is where the snow = add two stops falls down when using any automatic exposure system. Each exposure will be slightly different from the next because of the differing total tonality of the image. You can watch your camera doing just that. And that is where my meter failed me in the klutz note above. I was shooting back lit yellow leaves against a blue sky. That appears to be almost perfectly two stops brighter than 18% grey, as I discovered in post processing.

10-19-2011, 05:18 PM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: La Jolla, CA.
Posts: 262
Almost arcane, really? Since I am pretty green, I am just trying different things and am not set in one way or the other in many aspects.

I don't believe that adding two stops consistently to a spot meter reading is accurate unless you are photographing whites as they tend to appear grey with our camera's reflective metering. If I am remembering correctly, + two stops from middle gray is white and further + is blown (No detail). Black I believe is four stops below middle grey. Considering that we can recover probably four stops of shadow details with our K5s, it's probably best to keep those highlights in check and the easiest way I have found is through spot metering.

I wonder why nobody uses spot metering? I also use it to more easily blow the background while photographing products.

Last edited by IIGQ4U; 10-19-2011 at 09:27 PM.
10-19-2011, 05:47 PM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,547
QuoteOriginally posted by IIGQ4U Quote
Almost arcane, really? Since I am pretty green, I am just trying different things and am not set in one way or the other in many aspects.

I don't believe that adding two stops consistently to a spot meter reading is accurate unless you are photographing whites as they tend to appear grey with our camera's reflective metering. If I am remembering correctly, + two stops from middle gray is white and further + is blown (No detail). Black I believe is four stops below middle grey. Considering that we can recover probably four stops from of shadow detail with our K5s, it's probably best to keep those highlights in check and the easiest way I have found is through spot metering.

I wonder why nobody uses spot metering? I also use it to more easily blow the background while photographing products.
Adding 2 stops exposure is correct when I spot meter the brightest part of the image where I want to retain detail. You have said virtually the same thing above: "+ two stops from middle grey is white". What I am doing is metering the white and setting the grey value by adding two stops to the exposure. My problem is figuring out what in the scene is middle grey. I find it easier to meter the white. People do use spot metering, you and me included. The thing is, you have to know what your spot meter is telling you and expose for that.

I say "almost arcane" because I don't consider myself dedicated enough to be arcane. <Grin>
10-19-2011, 05:58 PM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: La Jolla, CA.
Posts: 262
Just use a grey card.
10-19-2011, 09:19 PM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,547
QuoteOriginally posted by IIGQ4U Quote
Just use a grey card.
Perfect for normal situations, but does not always work. An example of where the card may not work is a shaded waterfall. If I meter the white water, I get the correct exposure in that gully, not in the sun where my grey card is. Exposure is the trickiest of the elements that make up a photograph. Each of us has his/her favourite way of calculating the perfect exposure, and that's what makes this forum so interesting. We can all learn from each other.
10-20-2011, 12:50 PM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 206
Original Poster
QuoteQuote:
Another novel under my belt.
Lol, yeah, it did get kinda long..

QuoteOriginally posted by IIGQ4U Quote
I also wanted to add that a few of your images seem a tad cold to me, but this can probably go either way depending upon who you ask.

In regard to the image to the dead tree with the dangling swing, where did you meter for that photograph?
That's interesting - as I mentioned, I'm not sure which of the LCDs to trust - my IPS panel with eye/online tools calibration, or that of my Macbook Pro. The IPS panel shows most images as being on the warm side, to my eye, while on the macbook lcd, it's a fair amount cooler. I don't generally do a lot of PP, but do adjust white balance, adjust horizon or some cropping if needed, adjust exposure, fill light/blacks/recovery on most pics, although not usually to a large degree. for the WB, I'll usually sample from the image, and if not happy there, try the auto/daylight/cloudy/shade WB corrections but not usually adjust much beyond there...meaning mostly relatively basic adjustments without additional fine tuning.

Most of the images wind up on the slightly warm side, and I've been sort of 'splitting the difference' between the IPS panel and the MB LCD, worrying about images possibly being *too* warm.
For the tree pic, I intentionally left it somewhat muted/cooler, with a WB value of around 5350 - I think normal sunlight is around 6500 or so?
Were you seeing the same cooler colors on the other landscape images?

I think I had already convinced myself I'm going to need to buy a Spyder at some point, you may have just nudged me in that direction, at least to be able to narrow the gap in color representation between the pair of lcds..

RE: metering, I'm not positive I'm doing that correctly at all at this point, maybe someone can fill me in if I'm not doing this right?
I'll do a half-press aiming towards a neutral, and adjust the exposure or aperture to get the ev meter in the right general area, then shoot, review quick...if I'm clipping highlights or losing shadow details, I'll either apply ev comp, or try again. I am *not* using the AE-lock, however...which may be causing me yet more issues?

Yeah, it may well really be time to make it through the other hundreds of pages in 'TFM'
10-20-2011, 06:09 PM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: La Jolla, CA.
Posts: 262
Hi,

If you are shooting manual, I am not sure that you will really need AE Lock.

In regard to the warmth of your photos, I would say there were a few that were a little cold to me in addition to the photograph already noted.
10-20-2011, 09:54 PM   #15
Junior Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40
K-5 files need sharpening, right?

Thank you for your story. It and the replies helped me.

A general issue: sharpening K-5 images. The raw files seem to take a lot and need a lot. Maybe it is the K-5's 16 million pixels. Of course, you have to control the amount of sharpening; it is easy to go overboard.

Anyway, your Flickr set seems to be an example of the need. I applied a variation of sharpening to the shot of the rusted farm machine. It really makes a difference. If I were working on the raw file, I might select an area around the machine, heavily blurred around the border, and apply the sharpening there.

The variation of sharpening I recommend is called local contrast enhancement. I use Picture Window Pro, not Photoshop, so cannot give you a recipe; a Web search on the term will no doubt find lots. Local contrast enhancement avoids most of the halos (those white edges next to real edges) that ordinary sharpening often produces.
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!
camera, card, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, lens, lr, mode, pentax k-5, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-2000 won't turn on. neongirl Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 5 01-30-2011 12:50 PM
Pentax DFA 100mm/2.8 Macro WR ... at Prodigital 2000 twokatmew Pentax Price Watch 8 06-20-2010 07:26 PM
Pro Digital 2000 Warning Rush2112 General Talk 21 03-25-2010 12:14 PM
Prodigital 2000 -- Buying Lens Question twokatmew General Talk 39 03-24-2010 12:18 PM
2000 miles and 2000 pictures later Petthefish Post Your Photos! 4 10-03-2007 03:04 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:10 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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