Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-29-2008, 08:12 AM   #1
Veteran Member
kuuan's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 401
*istDS and blown highlights?

only a few days ago I bought a used *istDS.

after the first 350+ fotos I have got blown highlights too many times to comfort, quite a few photos were a rather overexposed, a few decidedly, all shot in Av mode.
It made me start thinking that my used camera might not work propperly.

I wonder:
are blown highlights a known problem of the *istDS
or that it rather overexposes?

thank's for any input,
cheers,
Andreas

04-29-2008, 09:02 AM   #2
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ohio
Posts: 247
Actually most report..myself included..the ds will usually underexpose to keep from blowing highlights..Post a couple of pics here so we can take a look...Bob
04-29-2008, 09:53 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 525
Yep, post some pictures and leave the EXIF data so we can take a look at them. I do not think my istDL ever overexposed a picture unless I have forced it to do so in manual mode.
04-29-2008, 03:10 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Kaunas
Posts: 1,452
QuoteOriginally posted by kuuan Quote
only a few days ago I bought a used *istDS.

after the first 350+ fotos I have got blown highlights too many times to comfort, quite a few photos were a rather overexposed, a few decidedly, all shot in Av mode.
It made me start thinking that my used camera might not work propperly.

I wonder:
are blown highlights a known problem of the *istDS
or that it rather overexposes?
I would say the opposite: *ist DS metering is very conservative and most often it underexposes to keep highlights under control.

Post examples of your overexposed pictures with EXIF intact. Otherwise it is really impossible to advise you anything.

04-29-2008, 05:15 PM   #5
Pentaxian
Arpe's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,329
Check you haven't got your exposure compensation dialled in to + some value. What metering mode are you using?
Pictures with exif intact - I third the motion.
My istDS, if anything, underexposed.
04-29-2008, 05:20 PM   #6
Veteran Member
Ivan Glisin's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Belgrade/Toronto
Posts: 656
Did you use spot metering for all shots by accident?
04-29-2008, 07:16 PM   #7
Veteran Member
kuuan's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 401
Original Poster
samples

thank you so much everybody for your concern

here some samples:

No 1, No 2 and No 3 were taken as RAW, imported into Lightroom ver1, exported as JPEG without any editing, reduced in size to 30% in Photoshop:
no 1:
Exposure Time: 1/4000 Aperture: f/5.0 ISO Equiv.: 1600 ( obviously had wrongly set ISO )
Metering Mode: center weight Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)


No 2:
Exposure Time: 0.0025 s (1/400)
ISO Equiv.: 200 Exposure Bias: 1.70
Whitebalance: Auto Metering Mode: center weight
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto) Exposure Mode: Manual


No 3:
Exposure Time: 0.0020 s (1/500)
ISO Equiv.: 200 Exposure Bias: 1.70
Whitebalance: Auto Metering Mode: center weight
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto) Exposure Mode: Manual


note:
on this first day of shooting the metering really was set on 'centre weight' as Ivan had thought.
that it says: exposure mode: manual in photo 2 and 3 I guess must be because they were shot with the M42 lens Takumar 35mm f3.5. On those 2 an exposure bias of +1.7 was dialed in which I had learned was necessary for measuring correctly with M42 lenses.

all the other photos were taken with the Tamron 18-200mm 3.5-6.3 XR DII



No 4, No 5 and No 6 were taken as JEPGs 6M ***, but even though also imported in LR vers 1 first and exported as JPEG without any editing, reduced in size to 30% in Photoshop:

No 4:
Focal Length: 18.0mm (35mm equivalent: 27mm...
Exposure Time: 0.017 s (1/60) Aperture: f/6.3
ISO Equiv.: 800 Whitebalance: Auto
Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)


No 5:

No 5:
Exposure Time: 0.020 s (1/50) Aperture: f/6.3
ISO Equiv.: 1600 Whitebalance: Auto
Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)


No 6:
Focal Length: 28.0mm (35mm equivalent: 42mm...
Exposure Time: 0.0010 s (1/1000) Aperture: f/6.3
ISO Equiv.: 200 Whitebalance: Auto
Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)


note:
some 2 or three photos I which were heavily overexposed I had deleted.

my personal sum up, resp. hope that my camera is not faulty:
no:1 don't get it.
no 2 and no 3: well, bias about +1.5 is recommended resp. necessary for M42 lenses, I guess I shall try with less the next time.
no 4 and no 5: was it just the very difficult light situation in the woods?
no: did the reflection on the car fool the camera a bit?
( but the sun was not very strong, a bit of overcast sky when shooting all the samples )
since there are also some which came out quite alright, please check the very first 14 photos you can see on my flickr page linked below ( the earlier photos were taken with the Konica Minolta A2 )

and at last, forgive me posting these 'bad' photos...

thank's a lot for any input,
cheers,
Andreas

Last edited by kuuan; 04-29-2008 at 09:43 PM. Reason: changed number of recently uploads from 12 to 14 since I uploaded 2 more now
04-29-2008, 07:42 PM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 602
No1: ISO (1600) was way too high during a sunny day, 1/4000 was the fastest speed the camera can offer. In this case the camera may have given you warning (flashing speed) that you did not notice.

This happened to me on the first day I had my digital SLR. I think your camera is OK.


Last edited by ddhytz; 04-29-2008 at 07:48 PM.
04-29-2008, 08:12 PM   #9
Veteran Member
kuuan's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 401
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ddhytz Quote
No1: ISO (1600) was way too high during a sunny day, 1/4000 was the fastest speed the camera can offer. In this case the camera may have given you warning (flashing speed) that you did not notice.

This happened to me on the first day I had my digital SLR. I think your camera is OK.
I hope very much my camera is OK, and yes, obviously had the setting wrong there. ( So far I have been shooting with the Minolta A2 which offeres more manual settings than the *istDS does. I don't get it wrong there, I should not have here. I have been using the A2 for almost a year though, i guess mistakes like this do happen when using a new camera )

The photos which worried me most are the ones taken on the trial along the river yesterday. OK, the lightning situation there was difficult, but almost all one of about 50 photos taken are unuseable, kind of blown highlights and generally washed out colors beyond repair. at least with my post processing skills. The water in the water fall simply is white, the greens lackluster, reflections on tree branches also moslty just white also.

Are those color renditions really normal?
( There were two photos which were OK, they are the last two uploaded to my flickr page ).

cheers,
Andreas

Last edited by kuuan; 04-29-2008 at 11:00 PM.
04-30-2008, 04:19 AM   #10
Veteran Member
MJB DIGITAL's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: st. louis
Posts: 1,173
#1 Duh, we all make mistakes. Sorry man, that is your fault not the camera. It happens to me on weddings too.... 8/

#2 and 3
You were using center weighted metering mode. Look at the center area of the photograph which is where the camera was metering from.....perfectly exposed. Yes the sky is blown out, but there is MUCH more light in the sky than there is reflected from the buildings. Camera is fine here too. Working great.

#4
You were using matrix metering. About 90% of the frame is exposed well. Again, the sky is blown out but remember: the sky is very easy to blow. It has so much more light than the ground....lots and lots of light in the sky....
sometimes its simply not possible to expose the sky and the ground.
i dont think the camera has a problem here either.

#5
Again, you have 90% of the frame exposed well. The part you have blown is a very bright white that is probably directly reflecting light from the sky. I've been around plenty of waterfalls like that and I know that I almost cant look directly at them....very bright whites there.

#6
You are shooting into the direction of the sun with the glare from a white vehicle reflecting straight into you from the foreground, then the subject (map) is in shadow with its back to the sun, so it is underexposed.
this is normal
04-30-2008, 05:45 AM   #11
Veteran Member
kuuan's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 401
Original Poster
I believe you 100% MJB Digital, and I believe that the camera is alright, thank's god.

However I still believe that my old trusted Minolta A2 would have faired better exposing in that valley and the waterfall. With it I have never got any water looking like in the following photo, just blank white, even the reflection on 'her' hand - and this is one of the best exposed photos I had got that afternoon! - so I must admit that I am a bit disappointed:



thank you very much for your detailed elaboration, cheers,
Andreas
04-30-2008, 05:47 AM   #12
Veteran Member
MJB DIGITAL's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: st. louis
Posts: 1,173
hey no problem

have fun shooting. 8)

and you may want to try something:
shoot for a normal exposure (which would be underexposed for us pentaxians) and then take it into photoshop and do a 'levels' adjustment. drag the middle slider to raise the exposure and see what happens

have fun
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Landscape Blown Highlights - Is HDR the Only Solution? Tamia Photo Critique 16 08-22-2010 01:10 PM
g20 highlights Gooshin General Talk 13 06-28-2010 06:52 AM
PP Challenge #15 Blown Highlights & Glass Reflection matiki Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 16 01-20-2010 10:05 PM
printing Digikam, dark prints or blown highlights DanS Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 6 12-21-2009 03:47 PM
Shadows or highlights? K20D enoxatnep Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 11-11-2009 08:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:18 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top