K-7 Image Samples from Japan

creampuff · 05-21-2009, 06:23 AM

RiceHigh, the sample photos posted at Pentax.jp are exposed fine imo.
The exposure compensation is not an issue because it all depends on the photographer's interpretation of what the right exposure for the scene ought to be. In fact the detail in the images, especially the farmhouse at dusk is very good.

The K-7 is causing such a buzz that Sony users I know who were looking forward to the new Sony A230, A330, A380 DSLRs are now shifting their attention to the new Pentax... making the new Sony cameras look pretty pedestrian.

jeffkrol · 05-21-2009, 06:30 AM

Originally posted by Andrew Faires

Hardly worrisome. Without any available comparisons (whether it be the results of an incident light meter or a different camera), 1/3 or 2/3 ev compensation means absolutely nothing....unless you can verify that the metering area averages out to middle-grey.

As for sharpness, details & colour - I'm looking forward to having a better look at the samples on my lunch break

Still is a histogram I can love.... to start.
Disclaimer..........ONLY early sample images.........

vizjerei · 05-21-2009, 06:33 AM

Originally posted by RiceHigh

I posted that already this morning.

Haha Check the time of my post, mine is Yesterday, 08:28 PM , your is Yesterday, 10:33 PM

Just that I post it in the DSLR discussion and it got moved.

Andrew Faires · 05-21-2009, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by jeffkrol

Still is a histogram I can love....

I didn't download the first shot, but the 2nd & 3rd shot both have histograms to love

.

sezme · 05-21-2009, 07:07 AM

Originally posted by RiceHigh

Btw, all the four samples required +0.3 or +0.7 EV compensation, no matter CWA or New 77 Matrix Metering was used, which is really worrisome from the very beginning!

Your comment makes absolutely no sense. Why would you expect a good photographer not to use exposure compensation?! Do you think there's no point in putting an exposure compensation button on a good camera? If you don't like the concept of exposure compensation, perhaps you should stick with point-and-shoots.

If you need an explanation, here it is: a camera is just a tool in a photographer's hands. No matter how advanced or automated a camera is, a good photographer will always know more about what he wants to convey than a camera does.

panoguy · 05-21-2009, 07:19 AM

Originally posted by sezme

No matter how advanced or automated a camera is, a good photographer will always know more about what he wants to convey than a camera does.

<sarcasm> But RH demands that the camera know all and remove him from the process of photography, since that is the only way to produce "technically correct" photos! </sarcasm>

Naturally, once he goes to a store and "tries one out for 20 minutes" he will be further disappointed because he had to leave "green mode" to make the countertops and racks of tripods look good. Pentax fails again!!

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 05-21-2009, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by RiceHigh

I posted that already this morning.

Btw, all the four samples required +0.3 or +0.7 EV compensation, no matter CWA or New 77 Matrix Metering was used, which is really worrisome from the very beginning!

The scenes and subjects don't look tricky to me neither. Hope the K-7 don't go down the route for an infamous DSLR for wonky metering and exposure once again! (as all Pentax DSLRs do, IMHO)

RH, try to contain yourself.

1) I see nothing wrong with them. The mountain is a bit booring grey, but it appears to have been such weather. The sunset...if you have a good enough screen or printer you will see that the darkish areas contains a lot of details, which looks really promissing to me.

2) This are obviously shot with pre-producion coppies of the camera. You cannot draw any final conclusions yet.

I really hope you will be reasonable when you review your copy. If you blow up minor problems and compare it with 2-4 times more expensive FF cameras, I will be dissapointed on you. While you have been shooting Pentax lenses on your FF Canon, I've even started to read your blogg, but I can easilly stop again if you fall back to your old bashing.

Mystic · 05-21-2009, 07:42 AM

I think RiceHigh has a good point!

remember how every reviewer blamed k10d and k20d exposure... they said that it doesn't expose properly and a photographer has to constantly use positive exposure compensation..
now pentax has made 77 zones metering and in the scene where the dark house is visible in the dawn there is +0.7 so if it were -0.7 it would mean a camera wanted to expose with more colors and brightness, however now, it seems that camera wanted to expose even darker.. so reviewer can freely blame that metering system again..
however my guess is that, the firmware version 0.3 or something like that isn't a 1.0
and further tweaks will make it expose more accurate without a photographer's intervention.

Torphoto · 05-21-2009, 07:56 AM

Guys, this is a classic case of a photographer manually adjusting his exposure, lets see when production samples get tested before bashing the exposure system.

GoldenWreckedAngle · 05-21-2009, 08:06 AM

The only thing more predictable than Rice High overstating a handful of Pentax flaws at every opportunity is a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity.

jeffkrol · 05-21-2009, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by Mystic

I think RiceHigh has a good point!

remember how every reviewer blamed k10d and k20d exposure... they said that it doesn't expose properly and a photographer has to constantly use positive exposure compensation..
now pentax has made 77 zones metering and in the scene where the dark house is visible in the dawn there is +0.7 so if it were -0.7 it would mean a camera wanted to expose with more colors and brightness, however now, it seems that camera wanted to expose even darker.. so reviewer can freely blame that metering system again..
however my guess is that, the firmware version 0.3 or something like that isn't a 1.0
and further tweaks will make it expose more accurate without a photographer's intervention.

OK, let's look at it this way..
Pentax, which designed some of the best light meters available chooses to set the meter to a particular standard. A standard that apparently others do not understand. It is not Pentax fault. this whole topic is quite interesting and is not always as it seems.
Some camera companies actually code an exposure increase in the EXIF. Meaning it exposes one way and then lets the software correct it...
PLEASE dig more info for yourself.....
Chasing a Gray Cat In a Gray Room: the level of middle gray and the headroom in the highlights for Canon 5D Mark II | LibRaw
Headroom in Highlights : Where is Zone V in The Digital World? | LibRaw
http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Exposure_Calibration.pdf
http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Exposure_metering_18.pdf

jeffkrol · 05-21-2009, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by GoldenWreckedAngle

The only thing more predictable than Rice High overstating a handful of Pentax flaws at every opportunity is a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity.

I hate dis-information and will not fail to correct it at any point. If I am wrong on anything I would hope that people would be brave enough to mention it. Nothing more embarrassing then believing something (or assuming something) that is not true..... or refusing to be flexible enough to admit it...
I half agree w/ your post.

blende8 · 05-21-2009, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by GoldenWreckedAngle

The only thing more predictable than Rice High overstating a handful of Pentax flaws at every opportunity is a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity.

Ha, ha ...
Well said.

nosnoop · 05-21-2009, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by GoldenWreckedAngle

a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity.

There are things in life that cannot be overstated...
You will understand once K-7 is released.

RiceHigh · 05-21-2009, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by Mystic

I think RiceHigh has a good point!

remember how every reviewer blamed k10d and k20d exposure... they said that it doesn't expose properly and a photographer has to constantly use positive exposure compensation..
now pentax has made 77 zones metering and in the scene where the dark house is visible in the dawn there is +0.7 so if it were -0.7 it would mean a camera wanted to expose with more colors and brightness, however now, it seems that camera wanted to expose even darker.. so reviewer can freely blame that metering system again..
however my guess is that, the firmware version 0.3 or something like that isn't a 1.0
and further tweaks will make it expose more accurate without a photographer's intervention.

I think you're the one who has got the whole point!

But, the official samples are all taken with a K-7 with firmware 1.0! Anyone interested can inspect the EXIF!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Japan K-5 Samples.	SpartanWarrior	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	38	10-15-2010 04:48 PM
Kx image samples on Imaging-Resource - soon	UnknownVT	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	11-17-2009 12:15 PM
Photo samples from K-7 Official Site Japan	vizjerei	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	06-06-2009 09:26 PM
Looking for da35macro image samples	Levi	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	02-25-2008 11:13 PM
image comparison using 'neat image' noise reduction programme.	distorted_vision	Post Your Photos!	18	12-28-2007 04:44 AM

05-21-2009, 06:23 AM	#16
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	RiceHigh, the sample photos posted at Pentax.jp are exposed fine imo. The exposure compensation is not an issue because it all depends on the photographer's interpretation of what the right exposure for the scene ought to be. In fact the detail in the images, especially the farmhouse at dusk is very good. The K-7 is causing such a buzz that Sony users I know who were looking forward to the new Sony A230, A330, A380 DSLRs are now shifting their attention to the new Pentax... making the new Sony cameras look pretty pedestrian.

05-21-2009, 06:30 AM	#17
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by Andrew Faires Hardly worrisome. Without any available comparisons (whether it be the results of an incident light meter or a different camera), 1/3 or 2/3 ev compensation means absolutely nothing....unless you can verify that the metering area averages out to middle-grey. As for sharpness, details & colour - I'm looking forward to having a better look at the samples on my lunch break Still is a histogram I can love.... to start. Disclaimer..........ONLY early sample images.........

05-21-2009, 06:33 AM	#18
vizjerei Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,418 Original Poster	Originally posted by RiceHigh I posted that already this morning. Haha Check the time of my post, mine is Yesterday, 08:28 PM , your is Yesterday, 10:33 PM Just that I post it in the DSLR discussion and it got moved.

05-21-2009, 06:37 AM	#19
Andrew Faires Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Ontario Posts: 744	Originally posted by jeffkrol Still is a histogram I can love.... I didn't download the first shot, but the 2nd & 3rd shot both have histograms to love .

05-21-2009, 07:07 AM	#20
sezme Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Toronto Posts: 59	Originally posted by RiceHigh Btw, all the four samples required +0.3 or +0.7 EV compensation, no matter CWA or New 77 Matrix Metering was used, which is really worrisome from the very beginning! Your comment makes absolutely no sense. Why would you expect a good photographer not to use exposure compensation?! Do you think there's no point in putting an exposure compensation button on a good camera? If you don't like the concept of exposure compensation, perhaps you should stick with point-and-shoots. If you need an explanation, here it is: a camera is just a tool in a photographer's hands. No matter how advanced or automated a camera is, a good photographer will always know more about what he wants to convey than a camera does.

05-21-2009, 07:19 AM	#21
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by sezme No matter how advanced or automated a camera is, a good photographer will always know more about what he wants to convey than a camera does. <sarcasm> But RH demands that the camera know all and remove him from the process of photography, since that is the only way to produce "technically correct" photos! </sarcasm> Naturally, once he goes to a store and "tries one out for 20 minutes" he will be further disappointed because he had to leave "green mode" to make the countertops and racks of tripods look good. Pentax fails again!!

05-21-2009, 07:23 AM	#22
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	Originally posted by RiceHigh I posted that already this morning. Btw, all the four samples required +0.3 or +0.7 EV compensation, no matter CWA or New 77 Matrix Metering was used, which is really worrisome from the very beginning! The scenes and subjects don't look tricky to me neither. Hope the K-7 don't go down the route for an infamous DSLR for wonky metering and exposure once again! (as all Pentax DSLRs do, IMHO) RH, try to contain yourself. 1) I see nothing wrong with them. The mountain is a bit booring grey, but it appears to have been such weather. The sunset...if you have a good enough screen or printer you will see that the darkish areas contains a lot of details, which looks really promissing to me. 2) This are obviously shot with pre-producion coppies of the camera. You cannot draw any final conclusions yet. I really hope you will be reasonable when you review your copy. If you blow up minor problems and compare it with 2-4 times more expensive FF cameras, I will be dissapointed on you. While you have been shooting Pentax lenses on your FF Canon, I've even started to read your blogg, but I can easilly stop again if you fall back to your old bashing.

05-21-2009, 07:42 AM	#23
Mystic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 490	I think RiceHigh has a good point! remember how every reviewer blamed k10d and k20d exposure... they said that it doesn't expose properly and a photographer has to constantly use positive exposure compensation.. now pentax has made 77 zones metering and in the scene where the dark house is visible in the dawn there is +0.7 so if it were -0.7 it would mean a camera wanted to expose with more colors and brightness, however now, it seems that camera wanted to expose even darker.. so reviewer can freely blame that metering system again.. however my guess is that, the firmware version 0.3 or something like that isn't a 1.0 and further tweaks will make it expose more accurate without a photographer's intervention.

05-21-2009, 07:56 AM	#24
Torphoto Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Trinidad W.I. Photos: Gallery Posts: 612	Guys, this is a classic case of a photographer manually adjusting his exposure, lets see when production samples get tested before bashing the exposure system.

05-21-2009, 08:06 AM	#25
GoldenWreckedAngle Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Abilene, TX Posts: 339	The only thing more predictable than Rice High overstating a handful of Pentax flaws at every opportunity is a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity.

05-21-2009, 09:03 AM	#26
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by Mystic I think RiceHigh has a good point! remember how every reviewer blamed k10d and k20d exposure... they said that it doesn't expose properly and a photographer has to constantly use positive exposure compensation.. now pentax has made 77 zones metering and in the scene where the dark house is visible in the dawn there is +0.7 so if it were -0.7 it would mean a camera wanted to expose with more colors and brightness, however now, it seems that camera wanted to expose even darker.. so reviewer can freely blame that metering system again.. however my guess is that, the firmware version 0.3 or something like that isn't a 1.0 and further tweaks will make it expose more accurate without a photographer's intervention. OK, let's look at it this way.. Pentax, which designed some of the best light meters available chooses to set the meter to a particular standard. A standard that apparently others do not understand. It is not Pentax fault. this whole topic is quite interesting and is not always as it seems. Some camera companies actually code an exposure increase in the EXIF. Meaning it exposes one way and then lets the software correct it... PLEASE dig more info for yourself..... Chasing a Gray Cat In a Gray Room: the level of middle gray and the headroom in the highlights for Canon 5D Mark II \| LibRaw Headroom in Highlights : Where is Zone V in The Digital World? \| LibRaw http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Exposure_Calibration.pdf http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Exposure_metering_18.pdf

05-21-2009, 09:08 AM	#27
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by GoldenWreckedAngle The only thing more predictable than Rice High overstating a handful of Pentax flaws at every opportunity is a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity. I hate dis-information and will not fail to correct it at any point. If I am wrong on anything I would hope that people would be brave enough to mention it. Nothing more embarrassing then believing something (or assuming something) that is not true..... or refusing to be flexible enough to admit it... I half agree w/ your post.

05-21-2009, 09:09 AM	#28
blende8 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Bremen, Germany Photos: Albums Posts: 1,521	Originally posted by GoldenWreckedAngle The only thing more predictable than Rice High overstating a handful of Pentax flaws at every opportunity is a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity. Ha, ha ... Well said.

05-21-2009, 09:19 AM	#29
nosnoop Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,299	Originally posted by GoldenWreckedAngle a handful of Pentax Forum members overstating Rice High's flaws at every opportunity. There are things in life that cannot be overstated... You will understand once K-7 is released.

05-21-2009, 09:27 AM	#30
RiceHigh Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,934	Originally posted by Mystic I think RiceHigh has a good point! remember how every reviewer blamed k10d and k20d exposure... they said that it doesn't expose properly and a photographer has to constantly use positive exposure compensation.. now pentax has made 77 zones metering and in the scene where the dark house is visible in the dawn there is +0.7 so if it were -0.7 it would mean a camera wanted to expose with more colors and brightness, however now, it seems that camera wanted to expose even darker.. so reviewer can freely blame that metering system again.. however my guess is that, the firmware version 0.3 or something like that isn't a 1.0 and further tweaks will make it expose more accurate without a photographer's intervention. I think you're the one who has got the whole point! But, the official samples are all taken with a K-7 with firmware 1.0! Anyone interested can inspect the EXIF!