[LostViking]

So as a noob to the whole Pentax system and APS-C format in general.

Am I understanding correctly that the Digital Preview will give me an actual version of the photo to be taken?
Depth of field and exposure?

Thanks in advance for helping me sort through the the FF, APS-C, Micro 4/3s, DSLR, Mirrorless, Jungle of information.

LV,

[vonBaloney]

Yes, that's right -- it takes the picture but doesn't save it. "Optical preview" is also available which stops down the aperture so you can see depth-of-field in the viewfinder.

[Kunzite]

Yes, that's right -- it takes the picture but doesn't save it.

But can't you save it after the fact?

[vonBaloney]

But can't you save it after the fact?

Yes! Just tested to double-check. I never use digital preview, only optical, but yeah you have option to save.

[Kevin B123]

Yes! Just tested to double-check. I never use digital preview, only optical, but yeah you have option to save.

I have never really understood the point of digital preview, why not just take the shot and save it since memory is rarely limited.

It just seems a solution looking for a problem to solve, to me anyway.

[Kunzite]

Yes! Just tested to double-check. I never use digital preview, only optical, but yeah you have option to save.

It's good that they kept this option (not that I ever used it so far...)

[vonBaloney]

I have never really understood the point of digital preview, why not just take the shot and save it since memory is rarely limited.

It just seems a solution looking for a problem to solve, to me anyway.

Seems like it might be useful for studio work when you are trying to get every detail and setting exactly correct and you can do it as much as you need, so you can use the preview over and over without ending up with a million saved shots on the card? But yeah, I don't use it.

[LostViking]

I have never really understood the point of digital preview, why not just take the shot and save it since memory is rarely limited.

It just seems a solution looking for a problem to solve, to me anyway.

Just to explain my question a bit further. I was curious if I would be able to see a close faxbcimily of the finished product prior to snapping the shutter. To evaluate where I want to be with both exposure and depth of field focus.

For example a critter in the woods with strong sun beaming down through the trees. It would be nice to see it prior to shooting.

Obviously is it is a bird in flight or a deer on the move, It would be less of an issue. I would just shoot and hope for the best.

Please keep in mind that my exposure (no pun intended) to these new formats is extremely limited. I fought the move to digital tooth and nail. I walked away still shooting Kodachrome 64 & 25.

I know there is much more latitude in modern DSLRs, or even Mirrorless for that matter. So this may be a non issue as you suggest.

Boo Boo here is a good example of what I am trying to say. A very dark subject in a well lit area.



Same for the bird, well lit snow in the foreground, dark water, varying colors of the subject, I tire of chasing these subjects with a point and shoot only to achieve mediocre results.


I shoot a lot of fires as well,
This is a Siberian Long Fire in all its heat throwing glory. It would just be nice to see what I will be getting before I get it.


Please excuse me for a bit. I will probably be asking a lot of stupid questions.

Here is another example a sunset with a shaded forground.


Hope that helps clear up my question somewhat. It's almost like I'm trying to learn a new language.

Thanks for the answers,
LV,

---------- Post added 06-19-21 at 04:43 PM ----------

Also, How do I edit posts here. Or do I not have have required number of posts yet to do so. Trying to correct typo/spelling eras.

[vonBaloney]

If you've been shooting with negative film, your biggest adjustment might be getting used to exposing so as not to blow the highlights instead of avoiding underexposure as you do with negative. (Digital is positive like slide film -- you can't recover blown highlights.)

[LostViking]

If you've been shooting with negative film, your biggest adjustment might be getting used to exposing so as not to blow the highlights instead of avoiding underexposure as you do with negative. (Digital is positive like slide film -- you can't recover blown highlights.)

I've been shooting exclusively with a Canon Powershot S3is for the last 12+ years. All of the above were taken with this camera.
6 Megapixels, broken flash, wonky working parts, just time to upgrade and move on.

Kodachrome 25 & 64 was slide (positive) film. I never did much with negative film.

[Ishpuini]

I agree that it's easier to simply make a test exposure that's saved to the memory card. Esp for wildlife photography. Even if the result might make you want to tweak the settings and repeat the shot, the opportunity can be gone in a few seconds. At least you'll have that first shot, that might be perfectly ok will a little extra post processing.

[Kozlok]

I concur with the others, just take the shot, look at it on the screen with the histograms, adjust exposure and take a second shot. Truthfully, I just shoot RAW and you can get several stops of fix in post-processing, so mostly I just shoot with autoexposure linked to focus point and fix it in post if needed.