[PentaxForums-User]

I love the output from my K100D, but...no I would not buy an other one.
If there was no upgrade on the horizon, I would buy an other K-7 body with second D-BG4 grip or maybe an KX in RED.

What are the downsides of a K100D vs. a K10D or a K-7? (Since you own a K100D).

I have a K-7, K20D, and am looking to buy a cheap 3rd camera (under $300).

[Ex Finn.]

OK, one reviewer thought he had purchased a slr/vid. cam. hybrid that ran by it self.
Other than that, 38 gave it 5 stars.
4 gave it 4 stars.
2 for 3 stars.
1 for 2 shiney ones.
Other than that, if you have one, do not be afraid to try different settings.
Just my 2 pennies worth.

[Ex Finn.]

Down side is slow, noisy shutter, small viewfinder, non weather sealed and no Pentax grip with second battery.
Other than that, it kicks butt.

[PentaxForums-User]

OK, one reviewer thought he had purchased a slr/vid. cam. hybrid that ran by it self.
Other than that, 38 gave it 5 stars.
4 gave it 4 stars.
2 for 3 stars.
1 for 2 shiney ones.
Other than that, if you have one, do not be afraid to try different settings.
Just my 2 pennies worth.

Also agreed. I think the K-7 is valid on the bad review, and all the good reviews, too.

For $800 body, some of the best lenses (and cheaper in price and size), in-body OIS, WR, etc. etc.... Pentax does kick ass.

But I guess many of us wish for $1500 Pentax would make a camera that does much more. I think many of us would be willing to pay more $$ for more Pentax camera.

It's so close to beating Canon and Nikon... if only they'd make a Pro model, and not only a prosumer model.

When I go shoot, I'm the only Pentax user amidst all my Canon and Nikon friends. Though I am able to carry more lenses, own more, and they marvel at how small it all is. I can carry 5 of the best limited prime lenses in a small zipper pouch made for a few cans of beer! And two bodies, a 28-70mm 2.8, 80-200mm 2.8, and 6 other prime lenses all fit in a small backpack. So size and weight and build rule.

Oh well... oh well... oh well.

[Ex Finn.]

Nothing is perfect. I also would hate to pay good money for something that does not work as advertised.
So far, all my stuff is up to snuff and functioning as expected = one happy Pentax user since 1982 or 84.
Hey, I could be biased.

[Ken T]

Well, I think if I'm not happy with Pentax and I would happy with another brand then I'll go for it . But right now I'm happy with my Pentax gear so I stay . As simple as that .

[kittykat46]

here you go:
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Pentax K-7 14.6 MP Digital SLR with Shake Reduction and 720p HD Video (Body Only)

I think the negative comment in Amazon probably relates to a particular problematic K-7 unit
If the buyer bought a defective camera, that is a valid complaint, but its really a different subject.

As far as my experience goes, a normal functioning K-7 exposes correctly, and it doesn't undersaturate the shots.
If you somehow took an underexposed photo, it will also appear undersaturated - the two are related.

As for the K-7 vs. Canons... I use a Canon 50D and 500D (AKA Rebel T1) now and then at work. Its not professional photography...mainly for documenting physical engineering design models at various stages and revisions, and also for failure analysis purposes. Accurate rendition and good IQ are important because the photos may later be the main or only visual record. The only caveat I would add is the two cameras are part of the office pool, and there's about 6 other colleagues who use them routinely. They are in working condition, but maybe not tip-top.

Apart from Drive Mode FPS and AF speed (not really critical for my application), the K-7 will stand up to any of the Canons.

That's the truth of it.

---

Last edited by kittykat46; 06-27-2010 at 10:03 PM.

[Cinders]

I just want to say, this thread got me thinking about fixing the problem. I went into custom image, and upped the saturation and hue just a little bit, and I'm already noticing a noticeable and much improved picture in my opinion. I'm so glad I decided to mess with it.

[Ben_Edict]

Pentaxforums-User – I have been using the istDS, K10 and K20. The K10 was the camera which gave the most inconsistent exposure in Av, so that I use it only in M. The K20 is just fine and usually very reliable. There is the odd shot which is over- and underexposed (1 in 100 or so), for reasons I do not understand - but that's a fairly good ration, I think and other makes are not better.

I cannot really see, that your obviously extraordinarily bad experience is a common one. It is well-known, that Pentaxes underexpose a bit to preserve highlight detail. But if my K20 produces a completely underexposed image, it is usually, because I misinterpreted the lighting and forgot to compensate (apart from the above mentioned app. 1% off exposures).

Some people, who have complained about expsoure problems used their camera in spot merting mode frequently. Which leads to severs mis-metering, if not applied knwoingly.

The colours from all my Pentax DSLRs proved to be much better than those from Canon, as they may look a bit more muted (I shoot only RAW), but at the end are much more natural. Which a lot of people also acknowledged, including the small print lab I sometimes employ.

Just for trying I have used in camera JPGs as well. And with a 1-stop increase in saturation and sharpness, I can easily emulate Canon colours.

Ben

[mickeyobe]

I have a K100d and yes, it does under expose.
I like it.

Those under exposed areas have an amazing amount of rich, unseen detail that can quickly be revealed in Photoshop's "Enhance" setting with "Auto Smart Fix" or "Brightness/Contrast" or Shadows/Highlights or combinations of those settings.

The advantage of under exposure is that details that would normally be burnt out and lost in the highlight areas with correct exposure are retained by the underexposure.

I am satisfied with the colour saturation adjustments on my camera but under exposure will tend to give even greater saturation. I have set it to slightly desaturate colours.

I use spot metering almost exclusively.

Mickey

[lithos]

Generally, with digital, the rule of thumb is "It's easier to retrieve shadow detail than highlight detail."

[opiedog]

i had a *ist DL - dang, this thing underexposed, badly
then i moved up to the K10, - much, much better
then km - same as the k10

now kx - sometime does underexpose, but no biggie, exposure IMHO is better than the K10.

it also depends a lot on the focal length in use. w/ my 12-24, i have to compensate for exposure if the subject contains lot of sky and ground.
(wide DR)

overexpose and the sky turns from blue to white, underexpose and the sky is preserved as blue but the shadows become an issue. sometimes you have to compromise.

pentax 12-24 on Kx

blown highlights



preserved highlights

[kristoffon]

I have a K20D and found the metering will expose for whatever the brightest source of light is. So as long as I identify it beforehand and lock exposure elsewhere, or use spot exposure in a selected place, problem solved!

I find this to be helpful when shooting RAW though - it means your highlights will be ok and you can boost the shadows later in post and get a great photo. In JPEG it is indeed a hindrance.

Saturation you can easily boost in the custom image menu assuming you shoot jpeg.

[PentaxForums-User]

It seems many people are having the same "problem" as I... which may or may not be a real "problem" depending on your preference.

My conclusions are these so far....

A) Pentax under-exposes to preserve highlights. This makes sense. Depending on the model, at least Pentax does it consistently... so it is easily adjusted for according to your EV preference. Also it's probably because of dynamic range.... which is inherent to digital... that's why sensors get better each year, and there is the DR and HDR functions on the K-7. Sensors can't see at the same time both extreme highlight and shadow... so this reduces the range of the photo, so under-exposing saves the highlights. The HDR function, and better yet manual HDR with bracketing and software will fully capture the range humans can see. The Pentax (and most other digital cameras') sensor range just isn't advanced enough yet to capture this whole range in 1 photo. If Canon or Nikon is slightly better, it's because they've been making sensors longer (and offer higher end models). Also some Canon people complain Canon over-exposes. Canon purposefully boosts their exposure (and colors) to get that Canon look and "pop"... while Nikon stays greyish or muted or even natural.

B) On colors... yes - Pentax probably has the most natural colors. In the real world, colors are rarely vibrant unless you are looking at a peacock. Natural colors are just that - natural and ordinary. So I guess this is preference if you want them to "pop" like Canon. Some people like Canon colors because they are so unnatural and bright and vivid. (I guess personally I must realize I prefer unnatural colors that "pop" and don't mind blown highlights if that means the rest of the photo is exposed correctly and I don't have to spend time post-production.)

C) So I guess this is the approach Pentax has taken, .... save the highlights and give natural (if sometimes boring) colors. Adjusting these is up to us, by software and lens filters.

[GeneV]

I'm thinking of getting either a K10D or K100D Super as a 3rd camera. Since you have a K100D, what do you recommend? I hear so many things great about K100s. Is it better than a K10D? The price difference is only $100 used. ($200 vs. $300)

Many times I like my K20D images more than my K-7. Oh well.

I do prefer my K-7 overall and use it the most. But with my K20D as a backup... many times I look at an image for color/contrast/quality I really like, and find out it was my K20D not my K-7!

You might try the K-x as a third camera. There are a few that believe it underexposes, but, based on a prior thread, more, including myself, find that it tends to protect the highlights less. I do not own a K-7, but in my use, I find that my K10d, K20d and K100d all protect the highlights more than the K-x in its default settings. YMMV as to whether this is good or bad.

Like Robin, I shoot raw. The exposure, etc. differences of the camera and sensor (as opposed to the jpeg processor) are more obvious when you compare raw files. Raw files from my K-x are much brighter than from earlier models and more often require exposure correction down (or "recovery" in ACR), rather than adding "fill" in ACR, as in the other Pentax models. That may be more to your liking.