[Raybo]

Thank you Raybo, that is very kind -

Just to be sure - it is only the last two images and rest of ISO3200 album that were ISO3200 -
the first two very colorful images (of Derek Trucks and Susan Tedeschi) and the albums were mostly ISO1600 and ISO800.

Don't forget when images are downsized there is auto-corrolation going on - as noise is "random" - it tends to cancel itself out -
so getting from full 3008x2000 down to about 540x360 - is only 18% of the image, less than 1/5 linearly - that's why I can kind of get away with it.

Those ISO3200 images certainly would be able to print at 7x5 fine -
but a full 10x8 may reveal more noise than I'd like -
but then again it is better than NO image at all .......

Still very nice!

[Marc Sabatella]

i know the technical meaning is that the camera will try to meter 18% gray, but for a camera as advanced as the K100D, i could careless what 18% gray is just expose the shot properly.

The problem is that "proper" exposure is a subjective determination, one that pretty much *requires* human intervention. For example, take a picture of three objects: one black, one medium gray, one white. How on earth is the camera supposed to know that the black object is in fact black, and not just a grey object in worse light? Also, how is the camera supposed to know that you *don't* mind blowing out highlights to get the exposure you want, whereas another photographer does?

Expecting the camera to read your mind is craziness. The camera's "mind", on the other hand, is very easy to "read" - it only takes a little knowledge and experience to understand exactly how and why it is going to exposure the way it does and when and how you'll need to override the default exposure. If the camera tried harder to guess what you wanted, it would be be much harder to anticipate when it's going to guess wrong.

Bottom line: learn how to use the camera to meter properly and you'll find the camera helping you, not fighting you.

[Marc Sabatella]

it's the slap that concerns me more, it decreases handholdability. on the old ZX- bodies for example, those shutters are so smooth, probably gives an extra stop handholdability.

I highly doubt that. Most of the slap is on the *return* of the mirror, which takes place *after* the shot has been taken. The difference in mirror action between the K100D and any other (D)SLR probably makes no more than a small fraction of stop of difference in handholdability.

[Class A]

Sometimes you have to blow highlights to get an overall decent image otherwise you underrexpose too much of the scene.

I don't know any person (except you) who doesn't consider overexposed areas to be a flaw to be avoided. My solution to your "high dynamic scene" problem is to expose for the highlights and then use a tone curve to pull up only the dark areas. If the latter isn't possible than I need multiple images.

Most of the slap is on the *return* of the mirror, which takes place *after* the shot has been taken. The difference in mirror action between the K100D and any other (D)SLR probably makes no more than a small fraction of stop of difference in handholdability.

I find this a lot more plausible than the idea that the K100D mirror slap severely impedes on hand holding potential.

[k100d]

Bottom line: learn how to use the camera to meter properly and you'll find the camera helping you, not fighting you.

ha! i knew you would get back to me on the metering, Marc ... i wouldn't it mind if it exposed a bit brighter ... i used it a bit today and had mine at +0.7 indoors

I highly doubt that. Most of the slap is on the *return* of the mirror, which takes place *after* the shot has been taken. The difference in mirror action between the K100D and any other (D)SLR probably makes no more than a small fraction of stop of difference in handholdability.

mirror slap and shutter vibration makes a difference, otherwise there would be no need for mirror lock up. it's also why rangefinders can be handheld at slower speeds.

... to add to thes list of grievances, also poor AF accuracy, again Alfisti will back me on this too

[Marc Sabatella]

i used it a bit today and had mine at +0.7 indoors

And conversely, when I shoot in dark situations, I usually need to dial in *negative* compensation, to keep the camera from trying to make the scene look as bright as day. All depends on the scene and what effect you are going for.

mirror slap and shutter vibration makes a difference, otherwise there would be no need for mirror lock up.

I didn't say it made no difference. I said the difference between the K100D and other cameras is very likely less than you are claiming. Yes, the sound is loud, but most of that sound happens after the shot is taken, as is easily verified by doing long enough exposure to separate the sounds. I think you'll find that the K100D isn't that different from other cameras in the before-shutter portion, and since only that part will affect the shot, it's extremely unlikely that it is going to amount to anywhere near full stop of difference *compared to other (D)SLR's*.

[Alfisti]

And conversely, when I shoot in dark situations, I usually need to dial in *negative* compensation, to keep the camera from trying to make the scene look as bright as day. All depends on the scene and what effect you are going for.

I just cannot agree. OK if i am shooting a dark scene I need to dial in negative Ev, that's normal. However a scene that is fairly 'flat' like say a portrait indoors, needs a lot of positive ev.

The fundamental problem is that if ther eis a tiny, tiny piece of the scene that is bright, the camera freaks out and underexposes the entire image in an effort to save some miniscule highlight.

[Alfisti]

I don't know any person (except you) who doesn't consider overexposed areas to be a flaw to be avoided. My solution to your "high dynamic scene" problem is to expose for the highlights and then use a tone curve to pull up only the dark areas. If the latter isn't possible than I need multiple images.

I am not talking about blowing massive areas of the scene. Let's say you're taking a photo of a park with green grass and there is a coke can taking up 1% of the scene, the camera freaks out trying to protect that little coke can and the rest of the scene will need gobs of adjustment in post processing.

TBH though, i know what to expect and my default is a 0.7ev comp setting .... that's my 'zero'.

[maleek]

The more I use it (my K100D). The more happy and pleased I become. It just 'feels right'. A strange concept I know, but it just suits my needs extremely well.

[Marc Sabatella]

OK if i am shooting a dark scene I need to dial in negative Ev, that's normal. However a scene that is fairly 'flat' like say a portrait indoors, needs a lot of positive ev.

If the scene is lighter than 18% gray, sure. If the scene is right around 18% gray, it will be exposed perfectly. Actually, in accordance with ISO standards, it's more like 12-13% that the meter strives for - about a third to half of a stop under.

The fundamental problem is that if ther eis a tiny, tiny piece of the scene that is bright, the camera freaks out and underexposes the entire image in an effort to save some miniscule highlight.

It underexposed by *exactly* the amount required to keep the highlights from blowing. Pretty remarkable, actually, how many shots start clipping as soon as you add even a third of a stop of compensation. That's not "freaking out" - it's doing an amazingly effective job of accomplishing exactly the task it was designed to accomplish.

Anyhow, we all know that the camera tries hard to protect highlights in multi-segment mode. If you don't want it to do that, then why use multi-segment mode? You're asking the camera to protect highlights, then complaining when it does. Center-weighted metering is far more appropriate if you don't care about protecting highlights. I use it all the time, as I do don't really care about protecting every last highlight most of the time. But I certainly don't blame the camera for doing its job if I do put it in the mode where its job *is* to protect highlights.

[Alfisti]

I always use centre weighted, it's just an unsophisticated metering that's all. Frankly it's not that big a hassle once you're used to it but newbies are going to hate it.

[k100d]

I didn't say it made no difference. I said the difference between the K100D and other cameras is very likely less than you are claiming. Yes, the sound is loud, but most of that sound happens after the shot is taken, as is easily verified by doing long enough exposure to separate the sounds. I think you'll find that the K100D isn't that different from other cameras in the before-shutter portion, and since only that part will affect the shot, it's extremely unlikely that it is going to amount to anywhere near full stop of difference *compared to other (D)SLR's*.

when the mirror slaps up, if there is significant vibration right before the shutter opens, that can throw off your handholding esp for slow speeds. the K100D does a bad job of it.

And conversely, when I shoot in dark situations, I usually need to dial in *negative* compensation, to keep the camera from trying to make the scene look as bright as day. All depends on the scene and what effect you are going for.

i don't agree on this either. if you're shooting RAW and i know you are, if it's brighter as long as it doesn't blow the highlights, exposing as much as possible is beneficial.

-- Marc have you had a K100D before? or are you basing your comments on your experience w/ the K200D.

[Class A]

when the mirror slaps up, if there is significant vibration right before the shutter opens, that can throw off your handholding esp for slow speeds. the K100D does a bad job of it.

How have you compared that to other camera models? I've done hand held shots with incredible sharpness with my K100D. Perhaps your copy has a problem? Please care to let us know what makes you so sure that the K100D has a problem in that area.

\if you're shooting RAW and i know you are, if it's brighter as long as it doesn't blow the highlights, exposing as much as possible is beneficial.

Why would shooting in RAW make a difference?
In either case you'll have to pull down the levels in PP to achieve the desired scene impression. This will make all additionally captured details go away, so you might as well achieve the same effect in-camera. Unless, of course, you want to apply tone curves. In this case you could retain some more shadow details.

[k100d]

How have you compared that to other camera models? I've done hand held shots with incredible sharpness with my K100D. Perhaps your copy has a problem? Please care to let us know what makes you so sure that the K100D has a problem in that area.

it's not my camera. maybe i'm more used to my film bodies now.

Why would shooting in RAW make a difference?
In either case you'll have to pull down the levels in PP to achieve the desired scene impression. This will make all additionally captured details go away, so you might as well achieve the same effect in-camera. Unless, of course, you want to apply tone curves. In this case you could retain some more shadow details.

if you overexpose but don't blow anything out in RAW, then you adjust it down, it is always better than just shooting the picture darker yes because of retaining shadow details. digital cameras are more sensitive to highlights than to shadows. if you're shooting JPEG and you want it dark, then yes by all means do it in camera.

[Class A]

it's not my camera.

That's a statement again, not an explanation of how you arrived at your position. I guess it is safe to assume that you have a feeling but no objective data.

if you overexpose but don't blow anything out in RAW, then you adjust it down, it is always better than just shooting the picture darker yes because of retaining shadow details.

You only need the shadow detail for applying a non-linear tone curve, don't you? If you just scale down brightness globally then you may as well use less exposure right away. And again, the same applies to RAW & JPEG. No difference, except the normal advantages that come with shooting RAW (but are not specific to this particular issue of exposing to the right).