[kernos]

I shoot only RAW and get what I expect from the FA77 with really minimal touch up in LR. In fact, it is the lens most likely to produce great results for portraits right from the RAWs. But Brucebanner I don't use flash and I think with this lens that makes a difference. Flash, unless really delicately done (read studio) is going to wipe the microcontrast from the rendering. Also, the best color rendering seems to be stopped down a bit from wide open. 2.2 to 2.8 is best but the results can be lovely even really stopped down like 5.6 I don't think the issue is RAW files, as this is only giving you more information to work with. Nothing magic about the Pentax jpg engine and if you like it you can make a preset with slightly dropped blacks and highlights, and slightly boosted whites, shadows and clarity that will get close.

[runswithsizzers]

As I shoot RAW I typically have my EV values at -0.7 to protect highlights in post (shadows recover easier). My RAW images look dull until some post work is complete.

Sorry this is off-topic, since it does not discuss color, but your comment about exposure needs exploration.

Your shadows will be even easier to recover if you set your EV to +(plus)0.7. Search for articles about ETTR (Expose To The Right, like <here>) and <here>. In the vast majority of scenes, the extra exposure will not result in "loosing" any highlight detail in the RAW file. Even though your JPEGs will look pale, and the histogram (which is for the JPEG) may look like near-overexposure, most often any "lost" highlight detail can be recovered from the RAW file in Lightroom - and - you will gain more shadow detail while reducing noise.

Of course this assumes you are a RAW shooter who doesn't care about the camera JPEGs. And there are high contrast lighting conditions where negative EV is indicated. But for a RAW shooter to routinely underexpose in normal lighting conditions is throwing away dynamc range for no good reason.

I don't know what options your cameras have for User Presets and Highlight contol, but if you are not comfortable with the ETTR technique, consider making a User Preset to protect highlights in high contrast scenes, and return your EV to +/- 0 for routine lighting.

---------- Post added 11-14-18 at 09:46 AM ----------

In camera raw you can select a Pentax colour profile. In the "basic" tab click on "profile", select browse and select "camera matching". The Pentax options (bright/natural/landscape etc) should be selectable. You will need to be using a version of camera raw that supports your camera.

This is separate from the Lens corrections settings, which correct for distortion and vignetting and Chromatic aberration. Lens corrections do not alter the colours.

Yes. If you are using an older version of Lightroom/Camera Raw, then Adobe will, by default, display your RAW with a Profile called "Adobe Standard" which I NEVER used because it is very boring. A few months ago, Adobe changed the default Profile to "Adobe Color" which is a big improvement, in my opinion. However, Adobe offers half-a-dozen other options as well. And as pschlute says, there should be some profiles which are specific to Pentax, as well. Oddly, I just checked, and I am not seeing ANY Pentax-specific Camera Profiles for my K-3 in the latest version of Lightroom. Perhaps it is because I have my camera to deliver my raw files as DNG rather than PEF?

I haven't been shooting my K-3 enough to get to know it like I do my Fuji. In the case of Fuji, most often I tend to pick one of the Fuji profiles in Lightroom as preferable to the Adobe options, but more recently I do find myself using "Adobe Color" some.

I should say, no matter what camera profile I start with in Lightroom, that is usually just a starting point for additional corrections.

As for the OPs concern with the coloration of this lens vs. that one, in my limited experiece, any differences in coloration provided by a particular lens are rather subtle compared to the significant shift in coloration that occurs from changing a camera profile in Lightroom.

[pschlute]

Perhaps it is because I have my camera to deliver my raw files as DNG rather than PEF?

Don't think that would explain it. I use DNG exclusively and the Pentax profiles are available.

As for the OPs concern with the coloration of this lens vs. that one, in my limited experiece, any differences in coloration provided by a particular lens are rather subtle compared to the significant shift in coloration that occurs from changing a camera profile in Lightroom.

+1

[stevebrot]

Oddly, I just checked, and I am not seeing ANY Pentax-specific Camera Profiles for my K-3 in the latest version of Lightroom. Perhaps it is because I have my camera to deliver my raw files as DNG rather than PEF?

That is to be expected, at least for the desktop, perpetual-license, version of LR. The K-3II and K-1/K-1ii are the only recent models* with "Camera" profiles. There is some confusion regarding the "Adobe" profiles (backed by .xmp files) added in the recent updates to subscription versions of Lightroom and ACR and the traditional "Camera" profiles (backed by .dcp files) included as part of Lightroom, ACR, and Adobe DNG Converter or custom-made using the DNG Profile editor or similar tools. The bundled "Camera" profiles are reportedly created by the camera manufacturers in cooperation with Adobe and are what they do is difficult to explain except that they are part of low-level RAW processing and are dynamic in nature, meaning that subsequent edits in LR to things like brightness may result in complementary shifts in contrast and color balance. To make matters more complicated, Adobe Standard is backed by a camera-specific .dcp file and is technically a "Camera" profile as is the DNG embedded profile. I don't have access to the "Adobe" (.xmp) profiles in the subscription version and can't comment except that I have read they are dissimilar to the "Camera" variety in terms of what they do and how they work.

A blog article from Adobe (3 April 2018) has a fairly complete discussion of the new profiles and changes to the ACR and Lightroom interfaces to accommodate them...

April Lightroom and Adobe Camera Raw Releases: New Profiles and More | Adobe Blog

Addendum: Both profile types are included in the Adobe DNG Converter v.11 download.


Steve

* Legacy models with extended camera profile support include: K-7, K10D, K20D, and K200D.

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 11-14-2018 at 11:46 AM.

[repaap]

Will have to give that camera profile a go

[filmamigo]

I have the 43mm and 77mm.

I wouldn't describe the images from these lenses as "punchy". The qualities they exhibit are subtler, and may actually not be to everyone's taste.

I would describe these lens as having a "Zeiss-like" rendering. They remind me of the results I would see from my Rollei 2.8 F with a Zeiss Planar lens.

At first glance, the images don't jump out at you. They have a moderate overall contrast, that could be mistaken for muddiness. But the images have lots of microcontrast, and hold up well to further processing to taste, adding both local and overall contrast and saturation if desired. The microcontrast also gives the appearance of quite high resolution. These lenses don't test as being razor sharp on a test chart, but the subjective impression of the photographs is that they are very detailed.

I feel that shooting with the 43mm and 77mm is best aligned with shooting on film (where you have a negative that you can interpret for prints) or in RAW (where you can also interpret the final image.)

Sounds like the Pentax KP offers a nice .JPG straight out of camera, and I'm sure you could dial in a look you like. But these lenses seem like they are best deployed as part of an overall approach to capture a flexible image that you will work with in post.

[runswithsizzers]

That is to be expected, at least for the desktop, perpetual-license, version of LR. The K-3II and K-1/K-1ii are the only recent models* with "Camera" profiles. There is some confusion regarding the "Adobe" profiles (backed by .xmp files) added in the recent updates to subscription versions of Lightroom and ACR and the traditional "Camera" profiles (backed by .dcp files) included as part of Lightroom, ACR, and Adobe DNG Converter or custom-made using the DNG Profile editor or similar tools. The bundled "Camera" profiles are reportedly created by the camera manufacturers in cooperation with Adobe and are what they do is difficult to explain except that they are part of low-level RAW processing and are dynamic in nature, meaning that subsequent edits in LR to things like brightness may result in complementary shifts in contrast and color balance. To make matters more complicated, Adobe Standard is backed by a camera-specific .dcp file and is technically a "Camera" profile as is the DNG embedded profile. I don't have access to the "Adobe" (.xmp) profiles in the subscription version and can't comment except that I have read they are dissimilar to the "Camera" variety in terms of what they do and how they work.

A blog article from Adobe (3 April 2018) has a fairly complete discussion of the new profiles and changes to the ACR and Lightroom interfaces to accommodate them...

April Lightroom and Adobe Camera Raw Releases: New Profiles and More | Adobe Blog

Addendum: Both profile types are included in the Adobe DNG Converter v.11 download.


Steve

* Legacy models with extended camera profile support include: K-7, K10D, K20D, and K200D.

Thanks for the information and the link.

Fuji's camera profiles are film-themed with names like Provia, Arcos, and Velvia. In the Fuji community some say the Adobe-provided versions of Fuji's film simulations in Lightroom are different from what you see in a camera-created JPEG using the same film simulation. No big deal for me, as I consider the film sim/profile as only a starting point for my RAW file and not a goal.

I have noticed that if I use the "Auto" button in Lightroom's Basic Development panel, I get better results if starting with an Adobe profile than I do with a Fuji profile. But a Fuji profile can be applied after "Auto" with more reasonable results.

The linked article mentions third party profiles, including the collection from Matt Kloskowski. For what it is worth, I own the Kloskowski collection, and I rarely use any of them. Far too many of them have that obvious, overdone look of a false-color fantasy fillter. My style sometimes involves quite a bit of post processing in Lightroom, but I try not to cross the line into the territory of the absurdlly unnatural. Hopefully, some of the other 3rd party collections focus on more believable results.

[ZombieArmy]

I haven't used the 77 but the 43 doesn't exactly have a big color pop like the DA 40xs does. It's more muted and natural.

An example:

[kernos]

I haven't used the 77 but the 43 doesn't exactly have a big color pop like the DA 40xs does. It's more muted and natural.

An example:

I think that's the point although the technical term may be pixie dust.

FA77 K5iis f 2.8 natural light

[BruceBanner]

As I understand it ACR is a plug-in for Photoshop, not LR. I too have found that when using the "edit in" function in LR and select Photoshop, the raw file does not open in ACR. If I use ACR I always open the raw file directly in Photoshop, perform the raw conversion before cropping and other adjustments.

When you go to the LR "develop" module, the editing controls appear to be the same between a jpeg and a raw file but there differences, white balance options for example. The develop module in LR uses the same technology as ACR, so I don't think you are missing out by using LR instead of Photoshop for raw development.

At one point ACR was loading on it's own, somehow without me directly choosing it, kinda like a step you had to skip. It may have once been from 'Edit In' from LR to PS but has since stopped doing it, or right clicking a DNG file on desktop/folder in Win 10, Open With>PS and it would insist on bringing up ACR first. Like I said it felt like a poor mans LR so I just hit 'OK' every time and proceeded with my PS edits, but now you have me wondering if there are some merits to it

Arn't I missing out on colour profiles or something that ACR has for Pentax lenses that LR doesn't?

In camera raw you can select a Pentax colour profile. In the "basic" tab click on "profile", select browse and select "camera matching". The Pentax options (bright/natural/landscape etc) should be selectable. You will need to be using a version of camera raw that supports your camera.

This is separate from the Lens corrections settings, which correct for distortion and vignetting and Chromatic aberration. Lens corrections do not alter the colours.

I'm seeing for example in LR, very bottom right, Camera Calibration. Process: Version 4 (Current) and Profiles I can choose Bright, Landscape etc. Is this then the same as what ACR has? Or does ACR 'Pentax colour profile' offer something different?

I was referring mainly to the other two lenses.



I have both the 43 and 77, so I could compare them, and I have a few others so I could use those also. But it would be tedious to shoot the exact same scene with all lenses, plus it wouldn't necessarily allow a fair and complete comparison of all involved lenses.

The FA Limited do have a special rendering. Colours, I'd say yes, but not only that. The out of focus rendering, the center sharpness, the microcontrast are all contributors.

I think the best way to wrap your head around the differences is to look at many samples, to get an "averaged" opinion.

Having owned the DA40 and many 50s before owning the FA43, I'll say the 40 was clearly better than the 50s, but had much less character than the 43.

The 77 is in many ways comparable to the DFA 100 macro WR. Their rendering is close (I give the edge to the 77 but really they're not that different). I keep both because the macro is slow to focus, larger, and not as fast.

I really look forward to testing the DFA 50. I want to see how good it is as an artistic tool.

I saw this video;

Pentax 50mm 1.4 vs 43mm 1.9 Limited Series STILLS TEST Part 1 of 2 - YouTube

I linked that time to illustrate what I see with my FA77 vs some other lenses. It feels like it drives contrast and colours more. Despite the heavy corner vignetting (easily fixed in post), the FA43 @f2 I like more than what I see from the DFA 50 (in that particular shot/instance). Colours more saturated, punchier, DFA feels more 'washed out'.

Now as the video continues the FA43 seems more washed out, I think it's due to the sun, and the idiot shooting into it! Also, he even compared f1.4 vs f1.9 and I've always said the DFA50/1.4 is mostly about f1.4, that's where your monies really going! Starting both lenses out at f2 for comparisons is a tad odd imo.

But man look at the size differences of those two lenses. I just cannot ever have a DFA50, because I shoot primes only, and that means I swap lenses frequently from a belt pouch, they do need to be small in order to carry them on jobs. Something of this size needs to be a zoom imo, that makes sense, but a prime...! :S

Look forward to hearing your review however

I shoot only RAW and get what I expect from the FA77 with really minimal touch up in LR. In fact, it is the lens most likely to produce great results for portraits right from the RAWs. But Brucebanner I don't use flash and I think with this lens that makes a difference. Flash, unless really delicately done (read studio) is going to wipe the microcontrast from the rendering. Also, the best color rendering seems to be stopped down a bit from wide open. 2.2 to 2.8 is best but the results can be lovely even really stopped down like 5.6 I don't think the issue is RAW files, as this is only giving you more information to work with. Nothing magic about the Pentax jpg engine and if you like it you can make a preset with slightly dropped blacks and highlights, and slightly boosted whites, shadows and clarity that will get close.

I can understand that. I own two lenses that I feel need the least amount of PP work, the Velvet 56 and FA77. I don't know if it is my copy but even f1.8 feels fantastically colourful and punchy, this shot requiring hardly any PP at all;

Sorry this is off-topic, since it does not discuss color, but your comment about exposure needs exploration.

Your shadows will be even easier to recover if you set your EV to +(plus)0.7. Search for articles about ETTR (Expose To The Right, like <here>) and <here>. In the vast majority of scenes, the extra exposure will not result in "loosing" any highlight detail in the RAW file. Even though your JPEGs will look pale, and the histogram (which is for the JPEG) may look like near-overexposure, most often any "lost" highlight detail can be recovered from the RAW file in Lightroom - and - you will gain more shadow detail while reducing noise.

Of course this assumes you are a RAW shooter who doesn't care about the camera JPEGs. And there are high contrast lighting conditions where negative EV is indicated. But for a RAW shooter to routinely underexpose in normal lighting conditions is throwing away dynamc range for no good reason.

I don't know what options your cameras have for User Presets and Highlight contol, but if you are not comfortable with the ETTR technique, consider making a User Preset to protect highlights in high contrast scenes, and return your EV to +/- 0 for routine lighting.

---------- Post added 11-14-18 at 09:46 AM ----------



Yes. If you are using an older version of Lightroom/Camera Raw, then Adobe will, by default, display your RAW with a Profile called "Adobe Standard" which I NEVER used because it is very boring. A few months ago, Adobe changed the default Profile to "Adobe Color" which is a big improvement, in my opinion. However, Adobe offers half-a-dozen other options as well. And as pschlute says, there should be some profiles which are specific to Pentax, as well. Oddly, I just checked, and I am not seeing ANY Pentax-specific Camera Profiles for my K-3 in the latest version of Lightroom. Perhaps it is because I have my camera to deliver my raw files as DNG rather than PEF?

I haven't been shooting my K-3 enough to get to know it like I do my Fuji. In the case of Fuji, most often I tend to pick one of the Fuji profiles in Lightroom as preferable to the Adobe options, but more recently I do find myself using "Adobe Color" some.

I should say, no matter what camera profile I start with in Lightroom, that is usually just a starting point for additional corrections.

As for the OPs concern with the coloration of this lens vs. that one, in my limited experiece, any differences in coloration provided by a particular lens are rather subtle compared to the significant shift in coloration that occurs from changing a camera profile in Lightroom.

I did experiment with ETTR at one point, I think mostly for Landscape work (a User Mode created for Landscape specifically). IIRC I had EV way higher than that +1.7 or +2. however I think I was metering Spot and locking AE at the highest shutter speed in the scene (like a cloud or something).
I gave up because I thought I was finding the brightest part in the scene, sometimes I got it right and barely a red blinky on the LCD, sometimes I got it quite wrong and a lot of the LCD was red. I was just doing too many retakes.

I ended up -0.7 EV I think from my left over days of using flash in Av mode PTTL and having flash set to 0 or +1 etc. This provided a nice punched out look for the person being lit outdoors, without that feeling of it being overdone and blatantly obvious.

Now you have me thinking tho. Yes I recall the principles of ETTR, and even if there is a hint of a blinky, it's unlikely to be there in RAW. Perhaps I need to revisit this idea of ETTR, but not for landscapes per se but as a general rule and take your advice and set for +0.7. I can always make a User Mode for Flash where EV is set back to 0.7 etc. So I thank you for that indeed good sir!


I'm in LR just now, I am a subscriber but have not updated for awhile (at all this year I think!), Under Camera Calibration I have Profile; Embedded, Adobe Standard and then Bright - Vibrant. I'm not seeing a Pentax specific colouring profile from within here?

The only Pentax Lens Profiling I can find from within LR is from the Lens Correction tool, but as mentioned earlier that leaves colours alone, it's a distortion, vignetting and defringing adjustment only...

And yes, that's kinda my point in regards to your last message. I edit the raw file in various ways, sometimes VSCO, sometimes Topaz, sometimes Nik Collection. The colours therefore dramatically change.

I'm now just curious to create a User Preset in the cameras I use (KP and K-1) and take a bunch of lenses and shoot the same thing and compare colours, I'm thinking I'd have to avoid RAW for this and get it all 'right' in cameras as a nice outputted Jpg to be fair (and not visit any PP tool). I know for example my Takumar's can render things a bit 'green', skin tones can appear quite off etc.

[pschlute]

I'm seeing for example in LR, very bottom right, Camera Calibration. Process: Version 4 (Current) and Profiles I can choose Bright, Landscape etc. Is this then the same as what ACR has? Or does ACR 'Pentax colour profile' offer something different?

I am using LR Classic CC. The colour profiles are in the Develop tab, under basic/profile (default is Adobe Color)/browse/camera matching.

[BruceBanner]

I am using LR Classic CC. The colour profiles are in the Develop tab, under basic/profile (default is Adobe Color)/browse/camera matching.

I'm not seeing that on mine.

I'm using (under Help>System Info) that I'm using Lightroom Classic versiion: 7.2

Under Develop and top right (Basic), I only have what the screenshot attachment shows.

Color or Black & White, WB temps (Custom, Auto, Daylight etc).

Nothing about Browse or Camera Matching here.

However at the bottom of my version of LR I have Camera Calibration, here I have Adobe Standard as the Profile, but can choose Camera Bright, Camera Landscape etc (as seen in the other attachment).

Am I to take it that where it says 'Camera Landscape' etc, it's actually applying those Custom Image presets found in the Camera body?

Either way, perhaps time to update my LR?

There was a reason I didn't. I mean I did, and then rolled back... Hmm...

Either way I've never seen anything in LR ever to do with Colour Profiles and being able to browse camera or lens. The only time I've seen that is when doing the Lens Correction tool in LR.

[stevebrot]

I'm in LR just now, I am a subscriber but have not updated for awhile (at all this year I think!), Under Camera Calibration I have Profile; Embedded, Adobe Standard and then Bright - Vibrant. I'm not seeing a Pentax specific colouring profile from within here?

All of the profiles you are seeing are Pentax-specific and all affect color rendering.

The only Pentax Lens Profiling I can find from within LR is from the Lens Correction tool, but as mentioned earlier that leaves colours alone, it's a distortion, vignetting and defringing adjustment only...

Yes, that is correct. FWIW, a "color profile" for lenses does not exist for any Adobe product, except perhaps for RAW conversion of fixed lens cameras.

However at the bottom of my version of LR I have Camera Calibration, here I have Adobe Standard as the Profile, but can choose Camera Bright, Camera Landscape etc (as seen in the other attachment).

Am I to take it that where it says 'Camera Landscape' etc, it's actually applying those Custom Image presets found in the Camera body?

Yes, those "Camera" profiles are an approximation of the in-camera custom image settings and are reportedly created in cooperation with the camera manufacturer.

I have been pondering this notion of "Limited colors". Yes, the pixie dust does include rather nice color rendering. My take has been that such is the result of excellent micro-contrast throughout the visible spectrum allowing for amazing "color tonality". This is not something that can be dialed in as part of post-processing. I have several lenses with notable color rendering that might be traceable to the composition of the glass itself. Those include the Russian/Soviet MC Jupiter-9 85/2.0 and Helios 44M 58/2.0. Neither require any particular PP to bring out the color character.


Steve

[pschlute]

I'm using (under Help>System Info) that I'm using Lightroom Classic versiion: 7.2

Latest version of LR Classic CC is version 8.0.

looks like you have those profiles but the interface is slightly different.

[BruceBanner]

I took two pictures this afternoon;





Each Image was taken with the other camera, so the K-1 seen with the FA77 attached was taken by the KP+HDDA35Macro, and vice versa.

I edited the shot of the KP first (ie taken with the K-1+FA77). I got the Camera Bright, Landscape, Portrait etc options in the Colour Profile, however when it came to editing time with the KP file (the shot of the K-1 sitting on the table) I wasn't being presented with those options anymore... only Standard and Embedded. Any idea why this was? Both were DNG raw files with same in camera setttings :S