[Chetverovod]

Hello, I am using Q about 6 months and have an issue - photos for default settings have low contrast. Standard 02 zoom and manual lenses are giving same result - image require post processing. What I am doing wrong?

[Abbazz]

Hello, I am using Q about 6 months and have an issue - photos for default settings have low contrast. Standard 02 zoom and manual lenses are giving same result - image require post processing. What I am doing wrong?

It's difficult to answer without seeing the pictures.

If you shoot in JPEG, you might want to crank up the contrast by selecting the "High Contrast" digital filter from the "Info" button menu.

If you shoot in RAW, you can adjust the contrast to your liking in your favorite image editor.

Cheers!

Abbazz

[mike.hiran]

you can also go into the info menu and choose a different image profile for jpeg - in fact you can adjust contrast, brightness, etc independently. Also, you may want to get a hood for the 02 - stray light from oblique angles will reduce contrast also. If you are shooting at high iso, contrast will be low too. Post some pictures so we can give you suggestions that apply to your situation.

[Giklab]

Check if you haven't bumped the JPEG processing setting off the default one. On DSLRs that's accessed with the right key on the direction pad, might be the same on the Q.

[Na Horuk]

a) Info, Jpeg mode. If its Natural or Muted, it will be low contrast. Film reversal, Bright, Vibrant have a little more contrast. you can press Info again and it will open a menu that lets you edit the jpeg mode, including contrast
b) Lens filters or lack of hood in sunny conditions can cause problems with contrast
c) If you shoot raw, the jpeg mode is only used for the preview thumbnails. Raw files always need PP, and they look like they are low contrast, low saturation. That is normal for raw files. Its up to photographer to use PP to make the raw data look like the scene he saw with his eyes; or like the finished image he wanted to produce.

[Chetverovod]

Abbazz,
agrant10,
Giklab,
Na Horuk,
thank you for commenting! Really I am using JPG, natural colours mode and don't have hood for the 02 standard zoom. Later, I will upload samples from my camera.

[babywriter]

Can confirm - this is true with pretty much all of the Pentax cameras, I think. I shot on "Natural" on my K-S2 for several months and constantly had to boost JPEGs in post. Switch to "Bright" or "Vivid" and I think you'll be happier.

[Chetverovod]

Can confirm - this is true with pretty much all of the Pentax cameras, I think. I shot on "Natural" on my K-S2 for several months and constantly had to boost JPEGs in post. Switch to "Bright" or "Vivid" and I think you'll be happier.

Thank you, for commenting. Now I will add samples.

---------- Post added 05-18-17 at 08:58 PM ----------

There's part of your problem right there. Natural is the second lowest contrast (after muted) of any of the modes.

Thank you, for commenting, I am using K-01 in natural colors mode and I dont have issues. May be Q has different definition of this mode.

---------- Post added 05-18-17 at 09:04 PM ----------

All photos are made in one day by 02 standard zoom
iso125, natural colors. Without posprocessing.

[url=https://flic.kr/p/UVJyU4]
[url=https://flic.kr/p/UVJzFp]
[url=https://flic.kr/p/UVJAyX]
[url=https://flic.kr/p/UVJBck]

[LensBeginner]

Overcast, first one looks overexposed as well.

[babywriter]

Overcast, first one looks overexposed as well.

I would agree - it's just tough to pull detail on a grey day like that.

My personal experience with the Q sensor (I have an original Q, with the 01, 02, 03, 04, and 05 lenses) is that it tends to produce pretty saturated color when the light is good. When you shoot on days like this, it's very difficult to get saturated results without post-processing.

Personally, I shoot in RAW+JPG mode. Usually, I discard the JPG and adjust the RAW file in post. It gives me much better control over the finished image - but I know not everyone wants to spend the time.

Maybe try the "vivid" color setting and see if that works better for you?

[CarlJF]

Overcast day aren't the best if good colors and contrast are wanted. You may want to use a more punchy setting than "natural" on these days. "Bright" could certainly help.

Depending on the subject, a bit of fill flash could also help to give some extra life to the colors and contrast. And with i'ts 1/2000 sync speed, the Q is really good at this. Set the flash exposure compensation at -1 or -2 and, if the main subject isn't too far, you could be surprised by the results...

[Na Horuk]

Yeah, overcast is 'worst case' for contrast. It is okay for some genres that require low contrast, like dreamy portraits. On overcast days, there is not much you can do. You have to work with it and make 'soft', eerie type of photos.
Similarly, photographing on a sunny, bright day around noon is too contrasty. You get strong bright areas with jagged, dark shadows. Its the other extreme from overcast.

Does your Q have the Reversal Film jpeg mode? I would recommend that one. Sometimes its too powerful, but usually its just great.

Anyway, the sample photos are not terrible. They still show the experience of that day. War is bleak, so its not bad that tanks are shown like that.

[Chetverovod]

So, from yours words, I had understood that camera and lens in a good conditions. Just photographer should turn on a head Thank you guys!

---------- Post added 05-18-17 at 10:43 PM ----------

Yeah, overcast is 'worst case' for contrast. It is okay for some genres that require low contrast, like dreamy portraits. On overcast days, there is not much you can do. You have to work with it and make 'soft', eerie type of photos.
Similarly, photographing on a sunny, bright day around noon is too contrasty. You get strong bright areas with jagged, dark shadows. Its the other extreme from overcast.

Does your Q have the Reversal Film jpeg mode? I would recommend that one. Sometimes its too powerful, but usually its just great.

Anyway, the sample photos are not terrible. They still show the experience of that day. War is bleak, so its not bad that tanks are shown like that.

Thank you! This discussion had expanded my understanding of photography technology on a cloudy day.

[wildman]

If all else fails there is always PP...
Actually I rather like the original better - more sufficiently grim.

Battle of Kursk. 5 July 1943 – 16 July 1943

Losses on the Soviet side:
254,470 killed, missing or captured
608,833 wounded or sick
Total 863,000 men
6,064 tanks and assault guns destroyed or damaged

Lest we Yanks forget.

[Chetverovod]

If all else fails there is always PP...
Actually I rather like the original better - more sufficiently grim.

Battle of Kursk. 5 July 1943 – 16 July 1943

Losses on the Soviet side:
254,470 killed, missing or captured
608,833 wounded or sick
Total 863,000 men
6,064 tanks and assault guns destroyed or damaged

Lest we Yanks forget.

Thank you, for your serious interest to World War II history!