[fg-one]

Comparing my K200D to a very recently acquired K5, I came to the conclusion that the K200D more easily produces in some situations pleasing (and realistic) colours. Here is one example, in mixed lighting.

Both were shot RAW on tripod (2 sec delay) using DA21 at f4, 200 ISO. Developed in LR3: both WB adjusted at 2400 °K, 0 hue. Resized at 1024 length for this post.

1: K200D

2: K5

I have to admit that the K5 did not really do justice to my cherry wood pieces of furniture. When I adjusted the WB using the same spot in both pictures, I got similar results because this did not change much the WB settings. I then tried to adjust the WB on the K5 photo to achieve the same colour on the furniture as I had got on the K200D photo and this is the result:

3: K5+

The furniture is now right but there seem to be an excessive orange cast on the walls and the white is no longer white, because to get the right colour on the furniture, I had to push the WB too much to the right.

I have to conclude that in this situation, I was unable to get the same result from the K5 as I easily got from the K200D. Could it be that LR3 is not as well tuned for the K5 as it is for the K200D? Any comment on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for reading.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

---

Last edited by fg-one; 10-09-2011 at 08:52 AM. Reason: photos appeared twice in the message

[fotaki]

Not quite sure what you were hoping to prove/achieve here but I am absolutely astonished at just how well the results from the two cameras correlate. Considering that they were manufactured a generation apart with differences in design, electronics, sensor etc., it really does boil down to a 'gnat's whisker' in overall results. Please don't forget that photography (under these conditions) is a very inexact science. This is the very reason why one has the ability to 'tweak' things here and there.

Subjectively, I prefer the somewhat neutral K5 results of #2 but, as you pointed out, the rendition of the wood of the K200D (#1) gives a better result. Possibly this might be important if you were a merchant/designer selling furniture but not an important issue here IMO.

[simico]

You just compared two camera profiles of LR, nothing else. By the way you didn't even tell what profile you used in LR under camera calibration.
If you want better comparison then use Pentax DCU with exactly same image tone settings.

[fg-one]

The camera profiles were both set to "Adobe standard" which looked the best for the K200D but not for the K5. Changing the setting to "embedded" made the K5 image colours as nice as the ones on the K200D image. Thank you very much for suggesting me to look into this. Maybe you can help me further. I was surprised to find the "camera standard" setting line only for the K200D. It was not there for the K5. I am using the 3.5 version of LR. Both files were .DNG. Any idea why this option is missing?

[simico]

Any idea why this option is missing?

I'm afraid only Adobe knows why. I seldom use LR, but in those cases I always use embedded profile for my K-5 DNG files because that's the closest to out-of-camera jpeg and/or output from Pentax DCU.

[kenyee]

looks more like white balancing to me...they both read the incandescent (?) light slightly differently but are fairly close. The K-5 is very slightly less orange.

[UnknownVT]

Comparing my K200D to a very recently acquired K5, I came to the conclusion that the K200D more easily produces in some situations pleasing (and realistic) colours. Here is one example, in mixed lighting.

Could I make a very simple suggestion?

This could be the difference in in Pentax's Image (Finishing) Tone.

I noticed going from a K100D to a K-x that Pentax seemed to make their default Image Tone "Bright"
noticeably less saturated and "bright".

On the K100D I normally use the Natural setting finding the default Bright setting too saturated -
whereas when I got my K-x - the default Bright setting was much less garish.

The Natural setting in comparison also correspondingly seemed more muted on the K-x than the K100D.

From dpReview of Pentax K200D -

The K200D's color response was very similar to that of previous Pentax digital SLR's. The image output in the default 'Bright' image tone is quite highly saturated (vivid), as can also be seen earlier in this review. Switching to the Natural tone calms color saturation to more typical levels (compared to other digital SLRs).

Unfortunately dpReview changed their format for the Pentax K-5, so I can't find the equivalent comment -
but as perhaps an indicator of the Pentax trend -
this is from dpReview of the K-x

The K-x produces an almost identical color response to its bigger brother, the K-7. As we've seen in other reviews the standard hues are also very similar to most other SLRs in this class, with minor saturation and brightness differences but essentially the same color response.

Perhaps I ought to add -
this may seem to only apply to JPGs since that's what dpReview was testing -
but even in RAW both Pentax DCU (Digital Camera Utility) and probably LR seem to understand Pentax dSLR settings -
so the camera settings are carried over when the RAW image is converted -
unless one deliberately overrides the setting in pp.

---

Last edited by UnknownVT; 10-12-2011 at 01:44 PM.

[RyanW]

How difficult is the excessive K5 purple fringeing to clean up?

[fg-one]

If you are referring to the purple halo at the top of the window, this is not actually a purple fringe but it originated from the temperature of the light coming from outside. The room was artificially lit and the white balance was set for the light inside. The WB is therefore totally off for the daylight that was peeping through the window. This is what generated the purple/blue haze. You often see this on indoors mixed lit scenes: either the WB is set for the light inside and you can see bluish areas, or it is set for daylight and there will be orange-tinted areas. It would be nice to be able to adjust the WB in a graduated filter in LR but that is not possible (yet). We are left with applying colour corrections in a GF, with sometimes mixed effects. Your comment is however very relevant to my new experience of the K5 because I found this camera is much more revealing of lens purple fringing than is the K200D, probably because of its higher resolution. I am having difficulties to clean it up in LR3. I can change the fringe colour but I cannot eliminate it.

[RyanW]

fg-one, yes, that purple halo at the top of the window is what I was asking about. Thanks for the clarification on that. One purple fringe looks like another to me, but now I know better.