[Studio20]

Having come from canon systems, i really like the colors on the k20d but i seem to get alot of noise and under exposure as well, i have tried using my sekonic L558 and that doesnt even come close to how far off my exposures are?
wondering if im setting something wrong on it?

[palmor]

Using the matrix metering will tend to underexpose. This is just the way Pentax does it, to preserve highlights. I tend to use center-weighted or spot meter and really don't have many issues.

If you do a search for "Pentax underexpose" I bet you'll come up with a ton of posts here and at dpreview.


John

[Lowell Goudge]

please post photo with EXIF data so we can help.

Without this you won't get anywhere

[Studio20]

Using the matrix metering will tend to underexpose. This is just the way Pentax does it, to preserve highlights. I tend to use center-weighted or spot meter and really don't have many issues.

If you do a search for "Pentax underexpose" I bet you'll come up with a ton of posts here and at dpreview.


John

i was on matrix and +1 compensation and it was still under, i have the katz eye screen in it as well, i will try the center weighted and see how that does vs the matrix, worse case spot and use the sekonic

[Studio20]

please post photo with EXIF data so we can help.

Without this you won't get anywhere

is there a way to post the exif without having to copy everything?

[deadwolfbones]

is there a way to post the exif without having to copy everything?

It'll be embedded in the photo if you save it properly.

[Studio20]

[ftpaddict]

is there a way to post the exif without having to copy everything?

I'm not sure I understand what "having to copy everything" stands for. Could you be more specific?

[nanok]

is there a way to post the exif without having to copy everything?

yeah, just don't strip the exif from the photo you post, we will be able to read it (either with a separate application, or using an exif reader plugin for firefox, for instance)

[Peter Zack]

Not that I'm aware of. But the Katz Eye could be some of the issue as well. But lets be frank. I have a friend with a 40D. and we've exchanged cameras a few times. When I see the shots from that camera the metering is totally different. Blown highlights and much brighter. Pentax went the other way and you do have to get used to it. As said before, they set the metering to preserve the highlights. Use the EV comp if you need to and use spot metering more (I use it 90% of the time).

Switch back to the narmal screen as well and see how that works for you.

[Peter Zack]

OK I was writing as you were posting the photo. Just looking at the image I wonder what's wrong as you see it. Sure the top of the Palm tree is a bit dark but the sky is near perfect and there's detail in the white sand. Overall that looks like a good shot.

Explain what you find wrong with it.

[nanok]

it looks very well exposed to me, conserving both highlights and shadow detail. looking at the histogram also shows that. perhaps 1/2ev more or so would have been possible, but i think that's pretty good as it is (unless the photo was corrected before, or ev compensation was used).

the katzeye is known to change exposure measurements, also, if you shoot raw, it will depend on your conversion process/settings how bright or dark the final result is.

edit: one more note: you have a lot of white sand there, any metering system will tend to underexpose in this situation, compared to what you "see", the same as with snow, for instance, even "smart" matrix metering is fooled usually, the result you got looks very reasonable though, to say the least.

[Sailor]

It'll be interesting to see some examples.

However, my experience with my K20D is rather the opposite. Both my DS2 and K10D exposed with a "dark bias", while my K20D produces images that are noticeably brighter. I shoot RAW, and front-lit subjects with my K10D required adjustment to "the right" invariably; analogous images from my K20D typically need little or no adjustment. In fact, I've found the segmented metering to be "too bright" and almost always use center weighted. I've never tried JPEG, so maybe that behaves differently.

Jer

I just saw the image - which looks to me like a typical beach shot in which the bright sand "fools" the meter. Generally, I add one-to-two stops on scenes like this one, which does a better job of replicating what my eye records. I don't know how many photography books tutored me to open up the camera when shooting in snowy environs or on beaches.

[jmbradd]

its working exactly as it should....its a multi-segment averaging meter, if you look at what the majority of your photo is, its sand and sky which are exposed properly. Beautiful sky!

[kenyee]

edit: one more note: you have a lot of white sand there, any metering system will tend to underexpose in this situation, compared to what you "see", the same as with snow, for instance, even "smart" matrix metering is fooled usually, the result you got looks very reasonable though, to say the least.

Ditto this. Cameras try to expose thing so whites are light grey. That looks like what I'd expect it to do. Try doing the same thing w/ a snowy scene and you'll see what I mean. You have to add exposure comp as needed...+1 or +1.5 probably from that scene...