[Rondec]

Sounds interesting but i can't reproduce it. When i press the iso-button and then the green button, nothing happens (in M mode on my K3). Am i misunderstanding something?

This is for the auto modes. If you are in Av or Tv mode and you hit the iso button followed by the green button it shifts you to auto iso. I don't think most folks use auto iso in manual mode, but I could be wrong.

[awscreo]

I find auto modes to be faster for me personally. I do like to use manual when I'm set on a tripod, can take my time carefully trying different settings and I am not in the rush. Unfortunately most of the time I'm on the go with the camera, and auto modes work better for me in those situations.

General question (in case someone wants to get offended - no offense is intended) - what are the advantages of manual mode over say Av with exposure comp? Or over TAv with basically only iso being at auto?

[normhead]

General question (in case someone wants to get offended - no offense is intended) - what are the advantages of manual mode over say Av with exposure comp? Or over TAv with basically only iso being at auto?

I wonder that myself. I Just live in AV. Take photo adjust histogram. Take keeper. Faster than using a light meter. Like using the needle in my ME, set the speed, set the aperture. Rotate the shutter speed dial to match the needle. Like that, only much easier.

Although I do use TaV for birds in flight where neither shutter speed nor aperture are negotiable.

[photoptimist]

I find auto modes to be faster for me personally. I do like to use manual when I'm set on a tripod, can take my time carefully trying different settings and I am not in the rush. Unfortunately most of the time I'm on the go with the camera, and auto modes work better for me in those situations.

General question (in case someone wants to get offended - no offense is intended) - what are the advantages of manual mode over say Av with exposure comp? Or over TAv with basically only iso being at auto?

In manual mode, the exposure settings do not change if you recompose or the scene changes. Thus M is nice if you've metered the light level and want all images exposed for that light level.

At some level, M + the green button has similar but flipped behavior of the auto exposure modes + the AE-L button. In M, the exposure is fixed unless you hit the green button but in the auto modes, the exposure is dynamic unless you hit the AE-L button.

Which one you use depends on how often you want the exposure settings to automagically change.

[awscreo]

In manual mode, the exposure settings do not change if you recompose or the scene changes. Thus M is nice if you've metered the light level and want all images exposed for that light level.

At some level, M + the green button has similar but flipped behavior of the auto exposure modes + the AE-L button. In M, the exposure is fixed unless you hit the green button but in the auto modes, the exposure is dynamic unless you hit the AE-L button.

Which one you use depends on how often you want the exposure settings to automagically change.

Couldn't you just press the exposure lock button beside the back focus button? Seems to do the same thing

[photoptimist]

Couldn't you just press the exposure lock button beside the back focus button? Seems to do the same thing

Yes, AE-L works until the camera turns off (either under user control or a time-out).

It just depends on what you want the camera's default behavior to be:
1) The exposure setting DOES NOT change unless you press a special button (M + green)
2) The exposure setting CONSTANTLY changes unless you press a special button. (auto + AE-L)

If every time you turn on the camera, you want a dynamic auto-exposure reading, then auto+AE-L works well. But if you want the camera to always use a certain exposure (e.g., a variant on sunny f/16, loony f/11, or metered incident light level reading), then M is much better.

[awscreo]

Yes, AE-L works until the camera turns off (either under user control or a time-out).

It just depends on what you want the camera's default behavior to be:
1) The exposure setting DOES NOT change unless you press a special button (M + green)
2) The exposure setting CONSTANTLY changes unless you press a special button. (auto + AE-L)

If every time you turn on the camera, you want a dynamic auto-exposure reading, then auto+AE-L works well. But if you want the camera to always use a certain exposure (e.g., a variant on sunny f/16, loony f/11, or metered incident light level reading), then M is much better.

Ok, I guess it's just a personal preference then. I should probably try to use m more just to see if it fits me. So far I've only used it on a tripod. Thanks for your input!

[savoche]

A "digital K1000" would be really cool. Would undoubtedly be a stunner.

Would I buy one? Heck no!

[plooksta]

A "digital K1000" would be really cool. Would undoubtedly be a stunner.

Would I buy one? Heck no!

I prefer the idea of a digital LX myself.

---------- Post added 02-06-17 at 07:59 PM ----------

I find auto modes to be faster for me personally. I do like to use manual when I'm set on a tripod, can take my time carefully trying different settings and I am not in the rush. Unfortunately most of the time I'm on the go with the camera, and auto modes work better for me in those situations.

General question (in case someone wants to get offended - no offense is intended) - what are the advantages of manual mode over say Av with exposure comp? Or over TAv with basically only iso being at auto?

If you need a part of your subject to stay at identical exposure over a series of shots you need manual. Say you are photographing portraits of someone on a black background, close up headshots and full body, Av mode will give you different exposures. For any given situation, once you have found the 'correct' exposure, it's just reassuring to have it set manually and know it's not going to be messed up. No more checking histograms...

btw I find Tav mode has a drawback, and that is it will overexpose once your ISO hits the floor (80). I think Pentax should add an auto adjustment feature where it will boost the shutter once you've hit minimum ISO and avoid overexposure.

[reh321]

A "digital K1000" would be really cool. Would undoubtedly be a stunner.

Would I buy one? Heck no!

I never bought the original K1000, so I'm guessing I wouldn't buy a digital version either.

The cameras that appeal most to me are svelte, not big and clunky.

[plooksta]

Then why doesn't he just buy what he wants?

Maybe Pentax owns his mind and he can't conceive of getting what he wants from a camera brand other than Pentax. OP, open your mind, there's more than Pentax in the world.

Just another 'Pentax should do what it does, and everything everyone else does too." thread.

It's not enough that the K-1 gives me IQ I thought I would never have been able to afford, good enough to end my thoughts of picking up a used 645D. Good enough, that for most of what I do it's overkill and I tend to use it as a "big gun" and leave it home when smaller will be better, and by far the best IQ per dollar out there, yet some folks are just never happy. It doesn't matter how good it gets, it's not good enough for them.

Actually I do have an open mind. I also use Nikon cameras and until it went in the sea, a Fujifilm too and a Hasselblad that I recently sold. Have also been know to use Olympus M43 cameras which are also excellent. I'll tell you why I make this point if it hasn't become clear:

1. Because I feel that the KP is occupying a very narrow niche and is not distinguishing itself enough. Old style interfaces have proven to be popular (e.g. Fuji). I thought diversifying the product could give it an advantage, and it is certainly something I would like to use. As it is, the KP is of no appeal to me, as the K-3ii and K-70 both represent better deals IMO. Obviously now it's too late for the KP, but maybe next time...

2. Because I have a range of Pentax lenses, and currently two bodies which I like. For reasons of expense and practicality I would not want to have to buy a parallel Fuji system, which has fewer lenses available anyway and a less refined feature set in other areas that Pentax really nails (WR, IBIS, OVF, batt life, etc).

In short a KP with shutter, EC and ISO dials would be close to being my dream camera. It would then only lack the Foveon sensor - improved for high iso of course...!

[awscreo]

I prefer the idea of a digital LX myself.

---------- Post added 02-06-17 at 07:59 PM ----------



If you need a part of your subject to stay at identical exposure over a series of shots you need manual. Say you are photographing portraits of someone on a black background, close up headshots and full body, Av mode will give you different exposures. For any given situation, once you have found the 'correct' exposure, it's just reassuring to have it set manually and know it's not going to be messed up. No more checking histograms...

btw I find Tav mode has a drawback, and that is it will overexpose once your ISO hits the floor (80). I think Pentax should add an auto adjustment feature where it will boost the shutter once you've hit minimum ISO and avoid overexposure.

I guess I haven't ran into this myself since I don't shoot studio portraits. But again, wouldn't locking exposure work too?

[savoche]

Are you wanting a dial which has a distinct labeled position for each available shutter speed? Not even my Super Program had that - as nearly as I can determine, the last camera I had with that kind of arrangement was the rangefinder camera I purchased in 1983. With as many shutter speeds as my K-30 has, I wouldn't want that kind of thing.

For the KP we would need 21 positions from 8s to 1/24000th, and that's in 1EV steps (adding bulb mode and auto here). Doesn't sound very practical to me.

Much the same for ISO, 15 positions if I counted correctly, still with 1EV steps.

EV compensation would work, though. And an aperture ring on the lens, of course.

I still prefer to have programmable buttons and switches. They have their drawbacks, but I can customise the camera they way I like it, and I can set up user modes for quickly getting to a known state. I use the user modes extensively on the GR. Not so much on the K-3 since it gives me a nice status on the top LCD as I switch it on.

But hey, we all have different preferences.

[Rondec]

I prefer the idea of a digital LX myself.

---------- Post added 02-06-17 at 07:59 PM ----------



If you need a part of your subject to stay at identical exposure over a series of shots you need manual. Say you are photographing portraits of someone on a black background, close up headshots and full body, Av mode will give you different exposures. For any given situation, once you have found the 'correct' exposure, it's just reassuring to have it set manually and know it's not going to be messed up. No more checking histograms...

btw I find Tav mode has a drawback, and that is it will overexpose once your ISO hits the floor (80). I think Pentax should add an auto adjustment feature where it will boost the shutter once you've hit minimum ISO and avoid overexposure.

Those are probably the only times I shoot in manual -- using flash or shooting a panorama where I want a consistent exposure between images shot. Otherwise I find the auto modes Av, Tv and Tav to be very satisfactory -- particularly if I tweak the exposure with EV compensation button.

But as I said before, I'm pretty easy. I figure out how to make the cameras do what I want and then I don't fight it. The fact that Pentax's interface has been pretty consistent since the K10 makes it a lot easier. Buttons move around a little between generations, but they still do the same things. If they took them away and replaced them with the dials you suggest, I think it would aggravate a lot of folks.

---------- Post added 02-07-17 at 05:50 AM ----------

Actually I do have an open mind. I also use Nikon cameras and until it went in the sea, a Fujifilm too and a Hasselblad that I recently sold. Have also been know to use Olympus M43 cameras which are also excellent. I'll tell you why I make this point if it hasn't become clear:

1. Because I feel that the KP is occupying a very narrow niche and is not distinguishing itself enough. Old style interfaces have proven to be popular (e.g. Fuji). I thought diversifying the product could give it an advantage, and it is certainly something I would like to use. As it is, the KP is of no appeal to me, as the K-3ii and K-70 both represent better deals IMO. Obviously now it's too late for the KP, but maybe next time...

2. Because I have a range of Pentax lenses, and currently two bodies which I like. For reasons of expense and practicality I would not want to have to buy a parallel Fuji system, which has fewer lenses available anyway and a less refined feature set in other areas that Pentax really nails (WR, IBIS, OVF, batt life, etc).

In short a KP with shutter, EC and ISO dials would be close to being my dream camera. It would then only lack the Foveon sensor - improved for high iso of course...!

I don't really think the KP is going to be that much of a niche camera. It is just a little over priced mid range camera. I expect Pentax to drop the price a little over time till they see the sales they want. They obviously tried for a slightly different look with the camera and added another dial --like the K-1. Otherwise I don't think it looks that much different from previous generation Pentax cameras.

[plooksta]

I guess I haven't ran into this myself since I don't shoot studio portraits. But again, wouldn't locking exposure work too?

Yes. Maybe it's just me. I like as few variables hanging as possible. I don't like having to check if the little asterisk is on or not. It's another factor that I could mess up.