[jgnfld]

I will have to look at the P mode, not familiar with it. With the ISO performance being so good I rather like the TAv mode - easy to set aperture and speed via the two wheels to suit the occasion and let the camera sort the ISO.
So far I have been playing with setting up the focus on various lenses and trying not to spend more money on new lenses. Though failed a bit there - waiting for a Pentax 55 - 300 PLM to turn up ; I wanted to see how the camera works for video (KAF4) and to see if the lens can match my old Carl Zeiss Jena 70 - 300mm.

Well described here The PENTAX Hyper Control system: A quick, effortless way to find the optimum exposure settings / explore | RICOH IMAGING

Does need a nonmanual lens, of course, so the Zeiss is out (but see Hyper M on the XP by scrolling down here) and also how it works there with AE locked or not. Re. lenses...lots of old, but very serviceable, screw drive autofocus lenses are out there and quite cheap/cheapish.

---

Last edited by jgnfld; 02-27-2021 at 06:15 AM.

[UncleVanya]

How does shooting in HyperP and TAv differ practically? I'm not clear myself. I'm trying to get used to trying TAv but if HyperP makes more sense sell me on it.

[carlb]

How does shooting in HyperP and TAv differ practically? I'm not clear myself. I'm trying to get used to trying TAv but if HyperP makes more sense sell me on it.

In TAv you choose both the shutter speed and aperture and the camera will adjust the ISO within a range you set. In HyperProgram you choose either shutter speed or aperture - you can set the ISO or I think you can leave it to set automatically within a pre-selected range (not 100% sure about auto ISO). I've been trying out TAv for a bit more control after using Hyper P almost exclusively.

[jgnfld]

How does shooting in HyperP and TAv differ practically? I'm not clear myself. I'm trying to get used to trying TAv but if HyperP makes more sense sell me on it.

Nothing to sell. They are very related and I've used both over the years. What I like about Hyper P is that the camera is already set up with general exposure settings for a whole sequence of shooting while you control only your specific needs to make a specific shot within that environment.

For example, when a bird-in-a-thicket shot comes up on the trail, I can instantly set the speed much higher while the system will automatically compensate aperture. If I want to take a landscape shot, I will often close down the aperture a bit over the camera defaults. Etc. Pressing the green button returns things to more general optimization values. The return is the only diff for me at least. There's nothing to return to with TAv. If you set yourself up to shoot a little bird with TAv, that's what you are set up for. Nothing else. In P you start out from what to me, at least, feels like a much better place.

This is the only difference I've seen in practice. But I like it as for me it minimizes what I need to think about for a specific shot, and especially any sudden, specific shot. Since most of my shooting involves hiking--often more than a bit backcountry--and coastal sailing--sudden targets-of-opportunity are quite common for me to deal with as well as large changes in lighting condition in short periods of time or even in the same general area. And for this P has become my preferred way over TAv after trying both out extensively over a period of years since my first K50. But I have no problem using TAv either at all.

I have read that the Hyper P mode on the K3iii will incorporate TAv more directly. And supposely M more than presently as well. Not sure if that will change its essential nature or not.

---

Last edited by jgnfld; 02-28-2021 at 05:55 AM.

[UncleVanya]

Nothing to sell. They are very related and I've used both over the years. What I like about Hyper P is that the camera is already set up with general exposure settings for a whole sequence of shooting while you control only your specific needs to make a specific shot within that environment.

For example, when a bird-in-a-thicket shot comes up on the trail, I can instantly set the speed much higher while the system will automatically compensate aperture. If I want to take a landscape shot, I will often close down the aperture a bit over the camera defaults. Etc. Pressing the green button returns things to more general optimization values. The return is the only diff for me at least. There's nothing to return to with TAv. If you set yourself up to shoot a little bird with TAv, that's what you are set up for. Nothing else. In P you start out from what to me, at least, feels like a much better place.

I’m afraid I’m not following you. Both TAv and P return exposure to a normal program line when the green button is pressed. Is it just more intelligence in the exposure recommended?

[jgnfld]

I’m afraid I’m not following you. Both TAv and P return exposure to a normal program line when the green button is pressed. Is it just more intelligence in the exposure recommended?

Whoops. I see I accidentally replied in the wrong thread even though you still saw it there. Here it is in its correct placing...

------------------------------------------------
In P mode, when I change the f-stop, both the exposure time and ISO vary to compensate. In TAv mode when I change the f-stop only the ISO ever varies. Especially if I have the ISO set in a smaller range, this leaves very little for TAv to do, actually, without manually changing the exposure time.

For me, I prefer the former. I'm comfortable with operating on an f-stop/exposure time continuum with any additional ISO change automatic (within a range). But Pentax is good at providing LOTS of options--especially on the KP.

Really fine points here and it took me years to decide on my preferred defaults. And to be honest, this could change, I suppose.
---------------------------------------------------

[mikesbike]

I don't have a default setting I always use. It boils down to what you need to control. The only setting for full control is the Manual mode without having ISO set to auto but to manual control. I often use this option, but of course not always. One main reason I choose it is when dealing with tricky lighting conditions which I know will fool the meter if using any of the automated options- including automated ISO. The next step is likely to be doing some spot meter readings of the scene to determine the exposure that will circumvent this problem and produce good results. Plenty of examples of encountering this with outdoor scenes, like snowy or sparkling water backgrounds, bright areas with dark forest backgrounds, etc, but can also happen with indoor scenes. With Pentax DSLRs, doing the spot meter readings in Manual mode is so much faster and easier- using the green button. Once settled on the exposure value needed, but either aperture or shutter speed is not appropriate to the need, first hit the AE-L button then select what you wish in either, and the other will follow along to preserve your chosen exposure value!

An extreme indoor example I have faced is a particular hockey rink where the front corner entrance has a row of very large windows for some distance along the front and side walls. So when the action moves to that end of the rink, if I am shooting from a position with those windows in the background during daylight, with the camera set to any automation whatsoever, I will get shadows for players. So I use full Manual mode, take spot meter readings at the other end of the rink, in various areas, but found the best being some area carpeting of a tan color of a good mid-tone and directly under the same lights as the skating floor. With my camera now manually set up in all parameters, I can shoot from any position and regardless of the background change, the players will be well-exposed, though the cars parked outside might be a bit washed out.

I have found the TAv mode to be especially helpful under conditions where I wish to control both aperture and shutter speed, but overall lighting conditions are constantly changing. Outdoor activities or sports on a day where clouds are marching across the sky is one such scenario. This mode can be very effective in dealing with such conditions.

I usually have my camera set to the P mode in case of a need to grab and shoot, and also just for general use. As long as lighting is not especially tricky, the camera usually does a very good job with exposure. Sometimes if I see a lighting problem when shooting at a certain angle, etc. I 'll just hit the +/- button to temporarily adjust for it. I prefer to keep ISO set manually, as it is so quick and easy to change it, but I might alternatively elect to switch to Auto ISO. Then with the P mode I can intercede by using the Hyper system to instantly choose a preference in either shutter speed or aperture as the need arises- just by selecting what I want with the thumb or finger wheels!. Full P mode is restored at a touch of the green button. Very fast and efficient, with the photographer as supervisor! A simple but truly ingenious design! I absolutely love having it.

[MJ43]

Pentax 55-300 PLM arrived today. First photo straight out of the box shot through the office window (actually second attempt as first I got excited and just clicked off without setting anything up - camera in manual mode). Maybe I should post this in the lens thread?
Flickr

[MJ43]

I have now had the KP for a couple of months - long enough for the initial excitement to wear off. Along with the camera I treated myself to 3 lenses a FA 200mm F2.8, Tamron 17-50 F2.8 and a DA 55-300 PLM. I can't say I have mastered the camera - in fact still a long way off from that. For still shots where you can set everything, up the camera is excellent far better than my K50 and old GX10. For action (motosports) whilst better than my older cameras it falls well short of my experience with a Cannon 7D Mk1 & Mk 2 (lens I used on the Cannon's were the 100-400 and the stunning, but wallet draining, F2.8 300mm - so a touch more expensive than the Pentax lenses. I hasten to add they are my daughters not mine).
My hit rate on the motorsport images that I would consider keeping is only about 25%, not much better than I achieve with the K50 and the manual 70 - 300mm lens I used to use (The Canon combo I have used is over 95% keepers). I did start questioning whether it was the lenses FA200 and PLM 55-300, but if I take the time these lenses using autofocus on still targets do produce acceptable results.
At this stage I guess I am slightly disappointed - though for the moment will put it down to lack of experience with the KP and probably too high an expectation on my part.
I can't make my mind up on handling - I think I prefer the K50 and GX10 for holding as I have on more than one occasion missed the shutter button and the shot.

On autofocus as long as I pre-focus on the target area the KP + PLM combo work as well as the Canon with only the occasional hunt (that is get focus completely wrong) though, as mentioned only about 1 in 4 are sharp enough to say the camera/lens combo did a good job.

I have a couple more visits to Cadwell Park over the next couple of weekends so will experiment a little more.

Example K50 + manual lens from a couple of years back


and yesterday at Cadwell - same corner not as sunny. I was trying to capture examples of the line to take to show daughter where she was going wrong. At this corner she was only just touching the kerb, consistently 18" out not attacking the kerbs enough - unlike the driver of the 205 shown.


Mmm... having just looked at these two back to back ... now I am not sure about anything...

[snakebite]

Well, I don't know that I would have bought Pentax if speedy focus was the main thing. That's clearly something brands like Canon and Sony are doing better than Pentax. Maybe the new K3 III ups the game a little. As for the two pictures you show, it's no contest. The KP shot is way better. I'm not sure there's anything sharp in that K50 shot.

[MJ43]

Well, I don't know that I would have bought Pentax if speedy focus was the main thing. That's clearly something brands like Canon and Sony are doing better than Pentax. Maybe the new K3 III ups the game a little. As for the two pictures you show, it's no contest. The KP shot is way better. I'm not sure there's anything sharp in that K50 shot.

Sorry that isn't a good example - I can't find the original but I am sure it was better.
A couple with the K50 and the same lens (70-300 Carl Zeiss Jena II) at Mallory Park last year.
Flickr

Flickr

[MJ43]

Back at Cadwell Park on Sunday playing motor bikes. They move a bit faster than the cars and proved to be a bit more of a challenge - I clearly need to figure out the best method which I suspect is to go back to all manual. With my K50 I had only ever used manual lenses and maybe some what naively thought that the AF lenses, particularly the PLM and the KP would be something else. I know that it is widely known that Pentax are not the best action camera but I didn't want to change brands so will persevere
I had the K50 with me and was swapping between cameras - until the KP battery went and I had to steal the K50 battery. I think I need to check settings on the camera (KP) as it does appear to work its way through a battery much faster than the K50?

[UncleVanya]

I had the K50 with me and was swapping between cameras - until the KP battery went and I had to steal the K50 battery. I think I need to check settings on the camera (KP) as it does appear to work its way through a battery much faster than the K50?

More pixels.
Faster Processor.
Accelerator Unit.
Larger files to save.

I'd expect a bit of additional drain on the battery.

[AgentL]

I've noticed, I don't know if it's a weird bug or what, but when I use live view, within a few minutes the battery icon will flash red. But switching out of live view it won't actually be drained.

[carlb]

I think you grow into the KP and some of it's differences. But once you do, it's a gem......at least that's my experience. The thing I found hardest to get used to was the location of the AF button on the back. I kept pressing the green button by mistake.