Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-04-2009, 07:36 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
My guess is that they are responding to the "Pentax underexposes" claims that many have made over the years, and are trying to make images look more like Canikon right out of the camera.
I too believe it is a response but not in an attempt to get "hot" images right out the camera but in order to give you images you may want to pull down, rather than push up in exposure.

QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
If I'm not getting a significant bump for the change, then why do it?
The intention by the designers, AFAICT, is to give you bump (more consistent metering, more headroom in PP, perhaps even with a view to exploiting the RAW DR).

But you shouldn't expect the images to come out of the camera the way you liked them. If you do, why not use constant negative exposure compensation?

08-04-2009, 09:41 PM   #17
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
I too believe it is a response but not in an attempt to get "hot" images right out the camera but in order to give you images you may want to pull down, rather than push up in exposure.


The intention by the designers, AFAICT, is to give you bump (more consistent metering, more headroom in PP, perhaps even with a view to exploiting the RAW DR).

But you shouldn't expect the images to come out of the camera the way you liked them. If you do, why not use constant negative exposure compensation?
because there were other issues. But just focusing on the exposure aspect, it is my strong personal preference to shoot a little underexposed then pull details out of the shadows. With Aperture I have less sucsess dealing with hot areas. I suppose I could dial in some negative to the K7 but if I have a camera that exposes like I want and has the same iq, then I have to figure the other aspects. AF is better on the K7 but I'm usually ok with the K20d. Fps means nothing to me as I don't shoot that way. And I was underwhelmed with the video as shooting under my typical conditions. So there isn't enough upside to make it worth my while. But everyone has different styles/needs.
08-05-2009, 03:47 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,147
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
I don't think this statement makes much sense.

Do press photographers use advanced cameras? The professional one I recently listened to will consistently blow highlights because underexposed images will look crap on newspaper paper.


That's what it is supposed to do under certain conditions. The metering/exposure does not work according to a "highlight priority". AFAIK, it is supposed to achieve exposure in accordance with "18% gray" metering. While this will give you blown highlights in some scenes, the important part is that the metering/exposure is reliable and that you can therefore predict what a (constant) exposure compensation will achieve.

Nothing to do with "entry level" vs "advanced level", as far as I understand. I understand that many expensive Canikons also have a "hot exposure" trait. Are these entry level as well?

It suited for entry level because for an "advanced" user burned out highlights is a no-no; just like for slide film. "Any" exposure that yields any detail will be good enough for a newspaper; the lowest quality demand for a published image known to man!

Whats the point of multipattern metering if you end up overriding it all the time? The point of this metering method is to be more "intelligent" than rendring everything with a tonality of 18%. If 18% is what you need, use spotmetering - everything you point it at will be rendered medium toned....
08-05-2009, 05:02 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
It suited for entry level because for an "advanced" user burned out highlights is a no-no; just like for slide film.
Burned out highlights are a big no-no for everyone unless it is done on purpose. I'd say the less experienced the user the more protection required hence beginners and their entry level cameras need the protection more than anyone else.

QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
"Any" exposure that yields any detail will be good enough for a newspaper; the lowest quality demand for a published image known to man!

Still, he doesn't use an entry level camera.


QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
The point of this metering method is to be more "intelligent" than rendring everything with a tonality of 18%.
Sure, but even smart metering doesn't know whether you are trying to preserve the highlights in a "light at the end of a tunnel" shot, or whether you'd rather retain some detail of the dark tunnel walls. Over to Marc Sabatella.

If the K-7 burned out highlights in each and every shot that'll be bad. If it does it once in a while in difficult situations I think that is to be preferred over overly cautious metering which will typically leave a lot of the dynamic range unused.

It would be a sign of an advanced camera if the metering were optimised for the higher dynamic range of RAW images. In that case, burned out highlights would in part reflect the more limited DR of JPEGs. That's not a very compelling argument, though, since the camera then should simply account for this in JPEG shooting mode.

I personally would like to have a camera / metering system which made sure that burned out highlights do almost never occur. However, it seems to me that complaints about the less conservative metering of the K-7 have more to do with users not wanting to adapt than something being wrong with the metering. I have difficulties in believing I'd have to work the K-7 more than another Pentax DSLR to get the shots I want. On the contrary, I think the net result would be more options in PP because of less constant underexposure.

I could be totally wrong.

BTW, does anyone from the "K-7 overexposes" camp know why "What Digital Camera" thinks that the K-7 underexposes? Yes, the review is sub-par in many ways, but is it that bad? If the K-7 did images as hot as Canikons, should it not have received the "credit" for it? Write to the editor Nigel Atherton and tell him what you think about the "underexposure" criticism.

08-05-2009, 05:13 PM   #20
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
With Aperture I have less success dealing with hot areas.
Sure, if there is actual clipping of the RAW data then this is a lot harder (or impossible) to fix than pushing shadow areas.

But did you really have a lot of clipped highlights in RAW data? I understood your previous comments as stating that the overall brightness was too much for your liking.
08-05-2009, 06:20 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 750
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
It suited for entry level because for an "advanced" user burned out highlights is a no-no; just like for slide film. "Any" exposure that yields any detail will be good enough for a newspaper; the lowest quality demand for a published image known to man!
On the contrary. Someone who knows what they're doing will adjust exposure to avoid clipping. They'll also adjust exposure to avoid dark, muddy photos. There's no "entry level" metering; there's only an entry level mind-set that the meter must be right in all conditions.

ETA: (even someone who doesn't know what they're doing can chimp it through and improve upon their first attempt - the joys of digital)

QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Whats the point of multipattern metering if you end up overriding it all the time? The point of this metering method is to be more "intelligent" than rendring everything with a tonality of 18%. If 18% is what you need, use spotmetering - everything you point it at will be rendered medium toned....
On the other hand, what's the point needing to override the exposure constantly in order to prevent under-exposed images? Hardly an advanced 'feature'.
08-05-2009, 11:14 PM   #22
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 485
QuoteQuote:
It suited for entry level because for an "advanced" user burned out highlights is a no-no; just like for slide film. "Any" exposure that yields any detail will be good enough for a newspaper; the lowest quality demand for a published image known to man!

Whats the point of multipattern metering if you end up overriding it all the time? The point of this metering method is to be more "intelligent" than rendring everything with a tonality of 18%. If 18% is what you need, use spotmetering - everything you point it at will be rendered medium toned....
Many (most?) scenes I shoot have a light dynamic range greater than my camera can record. I'm certainly not an advanced user, but in those cases I'd rather decide what the exposure should be, rather than have the camera preserve the brightest highlight even if it renders the most important (to me!) parts of the image in the noise.

Just curious what you do with all those scenes where dynamic range limitation means you blow highlights or lose dark areas to noise (or both). Maybe the scenes you shoot are better behaved with respect to light levels than what I find?

Maybe we should lobby Pentax to include a DBH exposure mode - Don't Blow Highlights, in addition to normal multi-segment metering. It might be useful.
08-06-2009, 07:25 AM   #23
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 57
QuoteOriginally posted by cfraz Quote
Just curious what you do with all those scenes where dynamic range limitation means you blow highlights or lose dark areas to noise (or both). Maybe the scenes you shoot are better behaved with respect to light levels than what I find?
I'd probably try the HDR function... Or decide whether shadow detail or highlight detail is more important for the specific scene I want to capture. I also find that there is a fair amount of DR headroom in the RAW files so by choosing neutral mode and knocking down contrast you should retain more detail. This will of course mean more PP but at least you then have the information in the file to work with.

As for the original question of the metering of the K-7, I think it's pretty much bang on in most situations and haven't experienced any issues with clipped highlights due to the camera overexposing scenes yet. Obviously, in many situations I will simply override the camera's metering and eg meter off the sky or similar to get my desired result but I've done that on every single camera I've owned.

Thomas

08-06-2009, 07:41 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 923
QuoteOriginally posted by cfraz Quote
Many (most?) scenes I shoot have a light dynamic range greater than my camera can record. I'm certainly not an advanced user, but in those cases I'd rather decide what the exposure should be, rather than have the camera preserve the brightest highlight even if it renders the most important (to me!) parts of the image in the noise.

Just curious what you do with all those scenes where dynamic range limitation means you blow highlights or lose dark areas to noise (or both). Maybe the scenes you shoot are better behaved with respect to light levels than what I find?

Maybe we should lobby Pentax to include a DBH exposure mode - Don't Blow Highlights, in addition to normal multi-segment metering. It might be useful.
There is another aspect to consider - the camera sensor actually records a greater dynamic range than what you can show on your PC monitor or paper print out. Its there in the RAW file - if you are willing to do some PP, you can work with the tone curve at either extreme ends to bring out the details on your screen.
08-06-2009, 08:14 AM   #25
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 239
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
For those shooting with the K7, are you finding you need exposure compensation? I'm finding that with FA ltd lenses 0ev is pretty hot. There is a significant difference when switching to -0.3, then less so (although darker) down to -0.7. It looks to me like -0.7ev is about the same as 0ev on the K20d (all other things being equal.

Or am I just lacking sleep?
K-7 for me is 99.9999% spot on no adjustment in EV needed. I came from K200D which usually needed anywhere from +0EV to +1EV - so maybe you're use to the darker images on previous bodies so K-7 is something of a change ?
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, exposure, k7, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why does EV comp not work in K-x? MichaelA Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 02-13-2010 11:44 AM
P5 Exposure Comp. Halco Pentax Film SLR Discussion 0 10-27-2009 07:08 PM
LX EV Comp Wheel Repair GEli Pentax Film SLR Discussion 4 12-08-2008 10:51 AM
Exposure Comp. Question JohnV3 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 27 06-08-2007 10:47 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:59 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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