Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

I have read from different threads about various issues that some K20D is not working correctly. Just for new comers (like me) that gotten (or about to) a K20D, to determine from simple tests to see if the camera is good or need to be return. It would be nice to create a thread to list the tests to be "run" to determine the condition of their K20D.

Go out and take pictures. That's the best way to see if the equipment works.

See: RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: K20D

I shall continue to try my best to gather the user reports you mentioned, the tests to be done and the possible solutions for those problems, if any.

It's nice of you to look for possible solutions for any problems Rice

I didn't look over your full page, but I was actually shocked by the Exposure Inaccuracy figures.
It isn't that I doubt the Pentax or even the Canon findings. I just can't picture the other brands nailing it 75+% of the time
In the conditions I shoot I must under expose at least 75% of the time for the results I desire, with both my systems.
It leaves me wondering what conditions they tested the others in

The likelihood of a faulty camera is very low. Your initial tests would be more about what settings of sharpness, contrast, saturation, etc. is most to your liking. The number of options is baffling!

RH, very interesting blog and I applaud your efforts, but I question the results for one reason: were all the pictures shot in the same conditions? Comparing results like these are can be very misleading unless all the equipment was used with the exact same conditions. That's hard to do unless you have all the cameras on hand and do the shooting simultaneously.

Thank you first.

As for your question: The scenes are different but the pics were taken by the same persons. As a random process, I can't see the reason why Pentax's sample pictures should mostly require more exposure compensations unless the metering and exposure are not so accurate as desired and required by the DPR technical writers.

In fact, it's impossible to have the cameras under test to shoot side by side for the same scene for the sample photos, as the tests were done at different time and outdoor. Even the testers went to the same scenes to shoot, the weather and lighting condition must be different. So, it is still impractical to compare at the end.

Hmmm.. you have a 5d and a k100. Should be easy for you to do the test...
At least w/ those 2 cameras. As I recall (could be wrong) you also have a friend with a K20. You could do the test with that one and your Canon. Would take all of an hour or 2 I suspect.

Before I should do the measurbation you (repeatedly) suggested for new cameras, here is the old one your should read (again?):

RiceHigh's Pentax DSLR System Sample Photo Gallery

I bet you will like it as you like old stories and old stuff. That would recall a good memory and refresh our memories for both you and me, I think.

Maybe you should also suggest similar shootout tests to be done by DPR guys whom are the most professional, famous, highly trusted by the public, expert measurbators outthere! I think they will buy your idea and take your good suggestions and advice and get them implemented!

RH, I read your blog post and I have a question. You have two links to posts by Ned Bunnell, citing them as proof of the underexposure problem when viewing the exif of the photos he had posted. I didn't look at every one of them, but of the ones I checked only one was taken in auto mode and the exposure compensation setting for that photo was +/- 0. The others showed exposure compensation set as high as 1.5, but they were shot in manual, which ignores the exposure compensation setting. My question is, what does it prove?

Many of the DA 17-70 samples were taken with a +0.5 to +1EV settings. For those scene, I don't believe I should need any of those compensation values with other cameras for the reflectance and nature of the scenes/objects, e.g., Pentax MZ film cameras even with slide films (which has even narrower exposure latitude than SLR digitals). So, that's my question. In fact, I have asked Ned for my observation, too.

But they were shot in manual, which means the exposure compensation means nothing. If you set EC to +1, but shoot in manual the exif will show the EC as +1, but it will have no bearing on what the meter actually read. I can set the EC to +1, in manual set the camera to underexpose by 1 and the exif will still show the +1 EC, even though I underexposed according to the meter. In manual mode the EC setting gets ignored and means nothing. All but one of the shots I pulled from Ned's blog were shot in manual. The one that was shot in AV had an EC setting of 0.

Dave: Thank you for pointing this out.

Regards,

Ernest

nope, just want you to do them.
I have a stat for you:
yellowstone Photo Gallery by Daniella T. at pbase.com
take the first 9 images and check the EXIF:
1- @ =.33 EC
6-@ -.33 EV
2- @ 0EC

Do the math yourself. Pretty crummy camera...
Actually your hero worship is nauseating at times and dp review staff is not the "be all or end all" of any "opinions"
of results based on a very small sample base.... we really don't have to go down this road do we?

It's not impossible, just very difficult, especially if you don't have the resources to have all the equipment at your disposal at the same time. It would require the same individual setting all of them up, and firing them at the same time.

Again, I'm not trying to take anything away from your efforts, just pointing out the big variable of not having all shoot the same picture under the same light and temperature.