Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-19-2012, 08:26 AM   #31
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 281
QuoteOriginally posted by loco Quote
Wow, those are some wide open spaces!
Yes, but it's not all like that out here; most of it, yes, but not all of it. Example. You cannot get an accurate feel for the prairie by just driving across it non-stop at 75 or 65 MPH. You have to stop for a few days in a single place, or drive at a very leisurely pace, stopping frequently, to fully appreciate and savor its subtle benefits.

The pictures to which I linked in my previous comment just happen to be some of the places that my dad lived, so I always made the most out of them whenever I got the chance (a DSLR would have captured their beauty a lot better than the cameras I used "in the old days"). Sometimes there is a "perfect" (IMO) combination of trees and prairie, especially near the rivers (like here and here; those aren't my pictures). Trees, to me, are like spices: You don't want to drown your food in them. Nor can you want to go without having any at all. Of course, maybe trees are like frosting on a cake to you; therefore, I can understand why you might love them spread evenly over the entire cake.

QuoteOriginally posted by loco Quote
I once drove to Denver from Virginia and was exposed to that sort of landscape for the first time along the journey. Very enlightening!!
Yes, Kansas and eastern Colorado, at least along Interstate 70, may not be a very fair comparison to the places to which I'm referring. From what I've heard and seen (only in photos), driving from Kansas City to Denver is not unlike driving down the center of a 600-mile long football field. Actually, the builders of all the interstates out here chose the most agonizingly boring routes they could find.


Last edited by Welfl; 08-19-2012 at 08:58 AM.
08-19-2012, 07:16 PM - 1 Like   #32
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 188
I just did a quick test for fun as well. I'm loving my K-30 and do love the amazing ability to recover from a very bad or unusable image.

On the histogram of the RAW file there was barley a sliver of data on the edge of the left end. didn't expect anything but am very very impressed!

Please ignore the picture itself, I was just taking a quick test shot and expected nothing to show in the image at all. Color correction was done as well as Topaz DeNoise on Strong to clean the image up.

Who needs high ISO when you can do this?

Attachment 138202

Attachment 138200
Attachment 138201

Last edited by knightzerox; 09-10-2014 at 08:47 PM.
08-19-2012, 07:33 PM   #33
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,624
LOL

That one is pretty extreme, I must say
08-19-2012, 08:17 PM   #34
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 281
QuoteOriginally posted by knightzerox Quote
Who needs high ISO when you can do this?
That's exactly what I've been wondering!

You seem to have answered my question!

For the most part.

I'm curious. How dark was the room to the human eye? Was it about as dark as we see in the second shot, or was it darker?

I ask because I'm wondering how much data can be recovered from a scene that is much darker than the one above, not pitch black, but overall pretty dark, and the ISO could even be 400 or 800, but no higher. I've played around with a few K-30, K-5 and K-01 JPEGs that I downloaded from Flickr, but those are JPEGs, not RAWs, and, even worse, they are comparatively low quality Flickr copies of those JPEGs. In spite of that, I was able to recover tons of great quality details from the shadows.

08-19-2012, 08:48 PM   #35
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 188
Hi, it was actually DARKER. I've of course increased the exposure to see how much could be recovered but the room was darker by say maybe 2/3 - 1 stop? It wasn't pitch black to the human eye.
08-19-2012, 09:07 PM   #36
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 281
QuoteOriginally posted by knightzerox Quote
Hi, it was actually DARKER. I've of course increased the exposure to see how much could be recovered but the room was darker by say maybe 2/3 - 1 stop? It wasn't pitch black to the human eye.
That is extremely encouraging to know! It confirms what I've been thinking for quite a while now, but couldn't test for myself. Thank you!

Of course, one wouldn't want to make a habit of shooting at ISO 100 in near dark conditions, especially at a slow shutter speed, but your test proves that one could "compromise" and shoot at anywhere from 200 to 800 (or even a little higher "in a pinch" ) and recover even more decent quality detail in post processing -- if necessary.
08-20-2012, 10:20 AM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,417
QuoteOriginally posted by loco Quote
3.5



Thanks!

LR4 has even bette highlight and shadow recovery control. "Fill" is gone. Now there are "highlight" and "whites" sliders for the top end and "shadows" and "blacks" sliders for the bottom end.
08-20-2012, 12:19 PM   #38
Site Supporter
loco's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,836
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by civiletti Quote
LR4 has even bette highlight and shadow recovery control. "Fill" is gone. Now there are "highlight" and "whites" sliders for the top end and "shadows" and "blacks" sliders for the bottom end.
That's what I've heard. Would love to be able to use it. This does give me incentive to upgrade my computer sooner than later. Can't afford it right now, though!

08-24-2012, 11:02 PM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 818
Oh my....

This is ridiculously good!

Hmm... Better start saving up for a K-30 now!
08-26-2012, 01:25 AM   #40
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 44
Mind sharing that raw ?? I'm very tempted to jump from Canon..
08-27-2012, 08:14 AM   #41
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 188
QuoteOriginally posted by CyberManiaK Quote
Mind sharing that raw ?? I'm very tempted to jump from Canon..
I assume you mean for the file I posted above? I'd be happy to, PM me your email address and I'll send it.
08-27-2012, 12:21 PM   #42
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 44
QuoteOriginally posted by knightzerox Quote
I assume you mean for the file I posted above? I'd be happy to, PM me your email address and I'll send it.
Got the file... Thank you very much !! There is a lot of detail !!!
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!
k-30, k-50, k-r, lightroom, pentax k30, pentax k50, range
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K5 vs k7 dynamic range vrrattko Pentax K-5 17 10-23-2011 06:25 AM
K5 and Dynamic Range dmort Pentax K-5 40 08-08-2011 04:31 AM
K7 Dynamic Range - beyond the charts yusuf Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 01-12-2011 05:11 AM
Is this what we call Dynamic Range:-)? planedriver Pentax K-5 6 12-02-2010 02:08 PM
Improving K7 dynamic range Tony3d Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 10-12-2010 03:27 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:11 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