Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-01-2013, 10:26 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 480
K5IIs LCD saturation

Hi, I'm not sure if this has been covered in another thread, as I couldn't find it, so here goes:

Was in my local camera retail outlet looking at the K5IIs. I had my K7 with me, and transferred by SD card into the K5IIs, to look at my pictures through the K5IIs LCD, which I know is gapless and brighter.

I immediately noticed that the pictures appeared very much more saturated. Not something subtle here - I'm talking about extremely saturated; over-saturated even, and my subjective impression was that the reds seemed the most extreme, although pretty much everything else was highly saturated too.

I asked for a second unit of K5IIs for comparison and saw the same thing. I asked for a K5 (Mk 1, original) and this time the pictures looked very much closer to how they appear in my K7.

I confirmed that all cameras in question (including my own) had LCD brightness set to zero, and had no adjustments done to the LCD colour whatsoever.

Has anyone seen this? In particular those who have experience using the K7/K5 in comparison to K5IIs?

Based on what I was seeing (heavily saturated images), I think that would definitely affect my picture-taking and reviewing process, and also the post-processing.

Interested to hear your experiences on this. Thank you very much.


Last edited by KDAFA; 01-01-2013 at 10:51 AM.
01-01-2013, 03:09 PM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,980
Were the K-5 II's perhaps set to a different custom image mode? I didn't notice any significant difference between the LCD on my K-5 and K-5 II.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

01-01-2013, 07:20 PM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
I notice a difference between my K-5 and K-5 IIs, but it doesn't bother me. I don't think I've changed either one from the defaults. K-7 images are fairly saturated to begin with, so you should notice an over-saturated appearance on the new screen.

Having my monitors calibrated is a big deal to me, but not the LCD on the back of the camera. But if it bothers you, why not adjust it? The key point for me is I can see the new screen better in daylight. Funny, but I only started to notice this (daylight viewing) problem on my K-5 a few months before the II/IIs announcement, but it made me really appreciate the change.
01-01-2013, 08:15 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Frankfurt am Main
Posts: 1,045
Had the images been stored in RAW?

Then it would really amaze me if they would look the same on the K-5IIs. The camera must interpret the RAW data to create a picture for the LCD display, and of course will use its own native parameters!

It is just impossible they are the same with 2 cameras/sensors/firmware versions which are so different.

01-02-2013, 03:15 AM   #5
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
perhaps the LCD screen on the K5IIs is based on a different technology perhaps they changed the IPS for a PLS panel because with the addition of video, the response times of the screen have to be significantly higher than what most IPS displays can achieve. Also I had an issue with my K5IIs screen - I noticed it had a green cast (Nikon has been in hot water over that) fortunately I corrected it to +5 magenta - has anyone else had to do this? ( yes I was using a fixed WB value of 5000K)

Last edited by Digitalis; 01-02-2013 at 03:34 AM.
01-02-2013, 04:49 AM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 480
Original Poster
Hi all, and thanks for your responses.

RKKS08, yes the images were in RAW (.PEF format). But remember that on the K5 MkI, they looked very close to what they look like on the K7. If indeed the difference is caused by different processing parameters internal to the three cameras, which it may well be, then it strikes me as a little odd that the K5MkI and the K7 look similar, whereas the K5II looks different, given that the K5 series use 14bit RAW files, whereas the older K7 uses 12bit. Rather, I might have expected the K5Mk1 and K5II to look similar, with the K7 being the odd one out. Of course, I can't know for certain the specifics of what's going on inside the various cameras' parameters, but personally I tend to suspect that the difference arises from the change in the LCD itself, since among the three, only the K5II uses a gapless LCD.

Adam, you mentioned about different custom modes. Did you mean as in "Vibrant", "Muted", "Landscape", etc.? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that those have an effect on the image during the capture stage, but have no effect when reviewing an already captured image...? (The exception would be when developing a RAW file in-body, but that wasn't what I was doing.)

DSIMS, you mentioned that the K7 produces fairly saturated pictures. What did you mean? Did you mean that when an unedited RAW file from the K7 is viewed on a computer monitor as compared to one from the K5, the one from the K7 looks more saturated?

You also suggested adjusting the camera's LCD. How do I go about doing that? As far as I'm aware, adjustment can be made for brightness and colour temperature. But not for saturation, right?

Also, I'm wondering if anyone has seen any documentation about the K5II switching to a PLS panel, or more generally, of using a different type of LCD than the K7/K5MkI?

Digitalis, thanks for highlighting about the green cast - something to keep my eyes open for... I really don't mean to be raising any alarm bells or whatever, but hearing your info, I just can't help wondering if at all there's any issue ongoing in regard to variations in the LCD behaviour among the K5IIs...


Thanks, everyone.
01-02-2013, 04:59 AM   #7
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by KDAFA Quote
You also suggested adjusting the camera's LCD. How do I go about doing that? As far as I'm aware, adjustment can be made for brightness and colour temperature. But not for saturation, right?
you adjust the level of saturation by altering the jpeg image processing parameters - it doesn't alter the saturation of the LCD itself - that is fixed. The image processing parameters for JPEG images affects the way the rendered jpeg thumbnail images that are embedded in raw files will look as well - and when you shoot raw that is what you are seeing, there simply isn't enough processing power in a camera to actually let you view a raw file.
01-02-2013, 11:26 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 480
Original Poster
Viewing RAW files on the camera's LCD

Thanks for your reply, Digitalis.

You wrote: "The image processing parameters for JPEG images affects the way the rendered jpeg thumbnail images that are embedded in raw files will look as well - and when you shoot raw that is what you are seeing"

I didn't know that when I view a RAW file on my camera's LCD, I'm actually viewing a jpeg version of it, embedded along with the RAW file - if that's what you meant?

Well I normally view pictures in such a way that one picture occupies the entire LCD screen - I don't use the 4, 9 or 16 thumbnails view. Are you saying that when I view the picture - which is occupying the whole LCD and not a mere thumbnail - that I'm actually seeing a full-sized hi-quality jpeg, and not the RAW file itself? If that were so, why then does the camera still require several seconds to develop a RAW file into a jpeg file, if the jpeg file already exists, for viewing? Sorry, I'm confused.

In any case, I always shoot in RAW mode, not RAW+. So as I understood it there is no jpeg file generated or embedded anywhere, until I specifically instruct the camera to develop the RAW file into jpeg - or am I mistaken here?

01-02-2013, 05:22 PM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by KDAFA Quote
DSIMS, you mentioned that the K7 produces fairly saturated pictures. What did you mean? Did you mean that when an unedited RAW file from the K7 is viewed on a computer monitor as compared to one from the K5, the one from the K7 looks more saturated?
Actually, it's something I noticed while looking at many, many images when I was deciding on the camera and lenses that would make up my kit.
01-02-2013, 06:25 PM   #10
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by KDAFA Quote
didn't know that when I view a RAW file on my camera's LCD, I'm actually viewing a jpeg version of it, embedded along with the RAW file - if that's what you meant?
that is exactly what I meant. and if you alter the Jpeg processing parameters you can alter the way that preview image will look (however the Raw file is untouched).
01-03-2013, 03:45 AM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 480
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
that is exactly what I meant. and if you alter the Jpeg processing parameters you can alter the way that preview image will look (however the Raw file is untouched).
You mentioned "alter the Jpeg processing parameters". Are you referring to those things like Sharpness, Contrast, Hue, Saturation etc., which are accessed by pressing the RIGHT Joystick while in shooting mode?

Or did you mean the stuff that sits in the Filters sub-menu, under "Base Parameter Adj", which we access by pressing the DOWN Joystick while in picture review mode?
01-03-2013, 04:28 AM   #12
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by KDAFA Quote
ou mentioned "alter the Jpeg processing parameters". Are you referring to those things like Sharpness, Contrast, Hue, Saturation etc., which are accessed by pressing the RIGHT Joystick while in shooting mode?
yes, that is all you need to change. I usually choose a low contrast so I can get a better picture of the dynamic range of the scene when I view the in- camera histogram
01-03-2013, 04:56 AM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,609
QuoteOriginally posted by KDAFA Quote
Thanks for your reply, Digitalis.

You wrote: "The image processing parameters for JPEG images affects the way the rendered jpeg thumbnail images that are embedded in raw files will look as well - and when you shoot raw that is what you are seeing"

I didn't know that when I view a RAW file on my camera's LCD, I'm actually viewing a jpeg version of it, embedded along with the RAW file - if that's what you meant?

Well I normally view pictures in such a way that one picture occupies the entire LCD screen - I don't use the 4, 9 or 16 thumbnails view. Are you saying that when I view the picture - which is occupying the whole LCD and not a mere thumbnail - that I'm actually seeing a full-sized hi-quality jpeg, and not the RAW file itself? If that were so, why then does the camera still require several seconds to develop a RAW file into a jpeg file, if the jpeg file already exists, for viewing? Sorry, I'm confused.

In any case, I always shoot in RAW mode, not RAW+. So as I understood it there is no jpeg file generated or embedded anywhere, until I specifically instruct the camera to develop the RAW file into jpeg - or am I mistaken here?
Even in RAW a JPEG file is created and embedded into the RAW file. The difference is that the resolution is smaller and the quality is lower. Also you can't directly access the file. It is just used for preview purposes.
01-03-2013, 05:04 PM   #14
Junior Member
Alfie's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 45
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
Even in RAW a JPEG file is created and embedded into the RAW file. The difference is that the resolution is smaller and the quality is lower. Also you can't directly access the file. It is just used for preview purposes.
Exactly. In the EXIF-data you find a tag "PreviewImageSize" which is 640480. With eg. ExifTool you can even extract this file. Another tag is "PreviewImageBorders" (28 28 0 0). Since the native format of K5's RAW (49283624, aspect ratio ~3:2) does not match VGA's aspect ratio of 4:3, 28px wide black bars are added on top and bottom of the JPEG. If you play back a file it is displayed shifted to the top of the LCD – no black bar on top, but 56px black at the bottom.

Interesting. Since I never use LV I gave it a try. The entire LCD was used. Obviously LV stretches the image ~13% in the vertical axis (424px => 480px).

Preview JPEG extracted from RAW:
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Alfie; 01-03-2013 at 05:35 PM.
01-04-2013, 01:44 AM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 480
Original Poster
Hi Digitalis, kadajawi and Alfie,

Thank you for your contributions.

As I think through what you've said, 3 questions come to mind, which puzzle me:

a. When I develop a RAW file in-camera to generate a jpeg file (choosing max. quality, max. resolution, and no parameters tweaked), and I then compare that file with the original RAW file (or as you have said, the embedded preview jpeg) using the K-7's LCD, I see virtually no difference in the quality - even up to 14X zoom. This would seem to indicate that the jpeg file developed from the RAW file, as compared to the "RAW-embeded preview jpeg", are on a similar level of quality and resolution. However, as Alfie has shared, the preview file is only 640x480, which is very far inferior - so something doesn't seem to fit here... Unless the 640x480 preview image is referring to something else...?

b. If indeed the "RAW embedded preview jpeg" is of very high quality - on par with the RAW-developed jpeg - why is it that the RAW embedded jpeg takes so little time to generate (ie. it appears almost instantly after we have captured a shot), whereas the development from RAW takes a good few seconds, even with no parameters tweaked?

c. Digitalis, you mentioned that when we press the RIGHT joystick in shooting mode, we can access the jpeg processing parameters. This makes me wonder why there is another place provided for us to do pretty much the same thing, as can be seen in the "Filters" submenu, under "Base Parameters Adj." There we also get to adjust things like Saturation, Hue, Contrast etc. But isn't that a duplication of function?

Thanks to all.
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, comparison, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, k5iis, k7, lcd, pentax k-5, pictures
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Monitor: LED, LCD, or LCD with Back-light? dmfw Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 11 01-03-2013 05:02 AM
K5IIs sample? pinholecam Pentax News and Rumors 349 12-20-2012 12:00 PM
k5II & K5IIs LCD screen scunning14 Pentax K-5 6 10-12-2012 03:37 AM
Red saturation K-7 milesy Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 01-17-2012 11:43 AM
Contrast, Saturation, Sharpness Antifreez Pentax K-5 3 10-21-2011 02:19 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:15 PM. | 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