[CyberManiaK]

EV is set at +0.7 here since pentax often underexpose so it's strange to hear you are actual even underexposing more...

See ? that's what I mean... I think that is the same behavior I have observed.

And yeah !! ETTR is an awesome technique mostly for raw shooter.. Have you ever tried ETTR with UniWB ?

[Anvh]

I havent setup an UniWB yet, no idea how to do it to be honest.

[CyberManiaK]

I havent setup an UniWB yet, no idea how to do it to be honest.

The idea is to get an histogram on camera as close to possible for raw and that will maximize signal noise ratio when exposing to the right. and this only can be done if you shot only Raw.

Here you can find the concept GUILLERMO LUIJK >> TUTORIALS >> UNIWB. MAKE CAMERA DISPLAY RELIABLE

[Anvh]

I know what it is but never looked into how to setup one
Since as far as i know it only works with fixed whitebalance, since the shooting i do doesnt have a fixed white balance it means it's off anyway or i need to adjust it all the time which i think is more work then it's worth.
Anyway, thanks for the link.

I'll play with the brightness, saturation and contrast when i've time, with those i could have a histogram that matched the RAW close as well when it comes to luminance.

[patrick9]

Originally posted by Anvh Quote EV is set at +0.7 here since pentax often underexpose so it's strange to hear you are actual even underexposing more... See ? that's what I mean... I think that is the same behavior I have observed.

I see now If someone chooses to not expose the way you want, then they don't know what they are doing.Is that correct?
Here is an a shot I took a few days ago. This is straight out of the camera except for resizing to post on line. I used -.5 so as not to blow out the fence .If I choose I can lighten the trees in PP . That is a lot easier for me than correcting a blown ot fence in front. Normally no one would see this shot till it had been PPed. I do plan a crop of the bottom, possibly a slight adjustment of the tree light ,or not. depends on my mood at the time
I do confess that my monitor is not calibrated . It is older than dirt and ought to die anytime so I do not plan to calibrate it I will on the next one. Especially since this is a hobby and not a business. It lets me do as I want and not be obliged to someone else's like or dislike of my shots. If it shows up to dark for you I am sorry. It looks fine in print to me
Don't get me wrong I am not upset in the least. I just tend to be a nonconformist. I tend to look at the world different than almost everyone else I know. I do what I want for me as far as hobbies go. At work it is a different story. Seems as if I have to make everyone but me happy.
If I paint a rose Purple,orange and black, but everyone else says it should only be one color red It doesn't make mine wrong. If that is how I want it. Just makes me happy and that Is why I do what I do the way I do it. I use to drive my teachers crazy in school too.

[patrick9]

Sorry the photo did not come thru

[Anvh]

I see now If someone chooses to not expose the way you want, then they don't know what they are doing.Is that correct?

No not at all, if underexposing does it for you then so be it and don't let what anyone say change that, i'm only saying that it's strange since so many actually say Pentax underexpose by default so they overexpose so it's just an observation.

If you think i'm making this up then please make a poll and see for yourself.
It could very well be your camera is off with the rest, who knows?


Your photo looks fine, i might have overexpose it slight more, 0.3 or 0.5 but not a full stop or 1.5 what seem most are using.
Personally since i shoot RAW i would have more leeway on the brighter side then what you see now so i might go that 1.5 stop but that's something personal, just different shooting style nothing more.

---

Last edited by Anvh; 08-29-2012 at 09:40 AM.

[Vicboy]

Pfft, if Pentax was just as well-marketed as Canon and Nikon, we'd also have the same kinds of people.

Stop thinking that Pentax is for more dedicated and serious photographers. Stop thinking that Pentax is special.

[ChooseAName]

Pfft, if Pentax was just as well-marketed as Canon and Nikon, we'd also have the same kinds of people.

Stop thinking that Pentax is for more dedicated and serious photographers. Stop thinking that Pentax is special.

I have no doubts that Pentax would have lots of Auto + kit lens zombies if they marketed like Canikon. I was more concerned with seeing people's opinions of the numbers of Canikon and the numbers of Pentax as they stand right now, and not if Pentax theoretically had the same marketing at the big two. Pretty much just wondering if the same percentage of Pentax DSLR owners do the Auto + kit lens kinda thing as the Canikon hordes that I've seen.

[starbase218]

Well, I think this has to do with marketing. People who want to get into DSLR photography know about Canon and Nikon, but not necessarily about Pentax. I've been on a photo trip to Iceland and one person in the group actually told me he never heard of Pentax before. Now, Pentax was bigger in the past, and the photographers who got into photography then (who may not be so different from beginners today) do know Pentax, and thus they are more inclined to buying Pentax again today as well. So I think it stands to reason that, on average, Pentax users know more about photography, simply because they started earlier on.

Also, at that photo trip, I got the impression I was among the people who knew most about the gear (note: not necessarily about photography!). The question which I find more interesting, however, is if that always translates to better photos (which, in my case, I think it didn't).

Actually, reading back now, the question actually concerns if the average Pentax user knows more than the average Canon/Nikon user. It does not specify what they would know more about. So then my answer would be that it doesn't matter. I don't think I'm more intelligent than the average Canon/Nikon user.

[patrick9]

[

If you think i'm making this up then please make a poll and see for yourself. It could very well be your camera is off with the rest, who knows? Your photo looks fine, i might have overexpose it slight more, 0.3 or 0.5 but not a full stop or 1.5 what seem most are using. Personally since i shoot RAW i would have more leeway on the brighter side then what you see now so i might go that 1.5 stop but that's something personal, just different shooting style nothing more.

I don't doubt you.
I have heard it before


I agree that it is a difference in style. That is pretty much what I was getting at . My last comment was mostly to CyberManiaK.
The shot was taken at an EV -.5 so if you increased it by 0.5 you would be at 0. I tend to shoot in jpeg more often than not. Simply because My P S Elements won't read the files from my camera till I run them thru another(usually silkypics) and change them to jpeg. So I just skip that step and shoot jpeg.

No not at all, if underexposing does it for you then so be it and don't let what anyone say change that,

I have no plans to change at this time and definitely not because some else says I should .
Thanks for your input Anvh

[CyberManiaK]

I see now If someone chooses to not expose the way you want, then they don't know what they are doing.Is that correct?
Here is an a shot I took a few days ago. This is straight out of the camera except for resizing to post on line. I used -.5 so as not to blow out the fence .If I choose I can lighten the trees in PP . That is a lot easier for me than correcting a blown ot fence in front. Normally no one would see this shot till it had been PPed. I do plan a crop of the bottom, possibly a slight adjustment of the tree light ,or not. depends on my mood at the time
I do confess that my monitor is not calibrated . It is older than dirt and ought to die anytime so I do not plan to calibrate it I will on the next one. Especially since this is a hobby and not a business. It lets me do as I want and not be obliged to someone else's like or dislike of my shots. If it shows up to dark for you I am sorry. It looks fine in print to me
Don't get me wrong I am not upset in the least. I just tend to be a nonconformist. I tend to look at the world different than almost everyone else I know. I do what I want for me as far as hobbies go. At work it is a different story. Seems as if I have to make everyone but me happy.
If I paint a rose Purple,orange and black, but everyone else says it should only be one color red It doesn't make mine wrong. If that is how I want it. Just makes me happy and that Is why I do what I do the way I do it. I use to drive my teachers crazy in school too.

It's not expose to they I want.. you are reading only what you want.. I said I see a lot of underexposed shots on the pentax groups,as well here in the forum. I wasn't referring exactly to you so I think you are overreacting but since you took it personal, for example I see a shot here in on your album will your camera take people pictures? he asked - patrick9's Album: street - PentaxForums.com That is exactly 1 stop underexposed, the same that you bias the exposure.. Probably you prints came fine because the printers do brightness/saturation correction unless you program to no do it.

But calm down men.. Don't take it personal I was referring in general not exactly to you. And seen the poll well.. I though why some Pentax user think they are superior to other users, if that was true it must show on the Pictures, right ? since we are talking about cameras/knowledge etc..

It would be something like if you are (example ok?) a Ford Focus (RS) user , and in your forum they think they are superior to lets say.. Corvettes... Well then they must show they are superior at the track. Got the point now ??

If your monitor is old doesn't care, if is working use it until it die, if its a CRT monitor believe me it's worth getting a calibrating device such as the pantone huey, I also use a very old CRT monitor, and I resist the idea to upgrade to an LCD even with IPS panel, because those offer better color reproduction when calibrated ( I have to calibrate mine twice a month due to age), and are not much affected by angle vision lol

Just because I saw your pictures probably you will want to dig mines also for flaws.. here is my stream Flickr: Carlos Pérez..'s Photostream in no way mine are perfect, I know it. I was just saying what I have observed and was kinda surprised because at least the new Sony sensors but tuned by Pentax are real kickers, and I can't believe why there are a lot of people not squeezing the quality that this cameras can deliver..

Honestly I can't wait to see the K-5 replacement, probably I will switch if it has all the things I need (not what I want because that's another story)

Cheers..

[patrick9]

Probably you prints came fine because the printers do brightness/saturation correction unless you program to no do it.

My printers are all set not to change settings on photo's . My monitor is an LCD bought when I bought the computer Lcd's were fairly new.The computer was built for photo and film processing and viewing. It is just ancient by computer standards and has outlasted my last two.
I have understood what you have been saying. I just like a good discussion. I am sorry if you took some of the things in the wrong way. I can usually argue either side. One thing is that I do still intentionally shoot a bit under exposed by the histogram. One thing is after having suffered a couple of times with snow blindness and other some extremely bright lights over the years. bright anything bothers my eyes. That is probably why I shoot the way I do. I am also sure there are others. Tho I am also just as sure there are others that shoot over or under exposed as not knowing any better.. From all brands. I also understand that It is only personal because I tend to be in the group of Pentax shooters that shoot under exposed.


I checked out your photo's Thanks for the link. I did notice that other than the Sears 135. When I looked at the shots on the first page I noticed I squinted a touch when I enlarged them..That Tells me that tho you like the exposure ( and that is the way it should be) , for me a slighter darker image for me would have been better . I do like the" What are you looking at" shot .The vignetting is a nice touch ,also the fence at sunset. Other than the brightness I like your macro shots . Again shots tend to be very subjective The reason we all shoot {unless a Pro} is to please ourselves and possibly a spouse.

[Chex]

The numbers are too skewed to have a decent comparison between any camera company users.. although IMO Canon shooters (mostly Rebel series camera's) tend to be the least knowledgeable I've come across in my travels.

[sqjaw]

With me I started out with a Canon EOS 20-d for a few year's and I complained like crazy why was it that other
camera makers were putting in shake reduction in their cameras and not canon .
So I got tired of complaining and got a Pentax 10-D and have been happy every since, more so
now since I am creeping up pass the 70's , your body kind makes you a little wobbly at times.
Both company's are very good but Pentax, has lately trumped the big boys with advanced features.
One was camera pro quality at a none pro price, sure it has had its days as a company but hope fully this new merger will get them back in the saddle again.