Brand new *istDS owner

I've been enjoying my new Pentax *istDS DSLR camera. Had a couple of surprises though: For one thing, the first pictures that came out had serial numbers starting at 1666 instead of 0001 like I expected. I didn't see any evidence that it had been used though. Another thing is that I'd been used to getting pictures in the 4:3 visual ratio of length to height from my Canon A70 and Canon S1 IS digital cameras. However, I can see that the 3:2 ratio that the *istDS has is consistent with 35mm film photos. It just doesn't fit my ACDSee browser as well. I also found my first pictures to be darker than expected. Not sure why this is but will try turning up the exposure value and maybe try some bracketing as well.

Anyway, I'd like to hear from other DS owners about general tiips and pitfalls to avoid as I begin using this camera. There do not appear to be many of us out there yet.

Thanks in advance. Bodryn

Bodryn, get used to darker images. It seems to be a problem with the DS. My experience is that it is worse with spot metering, but the other two options are still not as good as my Casio camera. I'm adjusting the exposue by one stop in most cases. That aside I'm very happy with the camera.

Cheers
Tony (Australia)

I'm "sorry" to report that I have no such "dark images" issue with my DS. In fact, I think the metering system is making quite a good job!

Check in what metering mode you are and study how they all work; it is quite easy to get under or overexposed pictures when you have a lot of dynamic range on your frame. And tell us what lens you're using.

Anyway, matrix metering usually gets out of these situations pretty well, but it doesn't hurt to know thy system and help it work for you.

When using my M 50mm F/1.4 , I only have spot metering, so I have to be carefull when shooting high dynamic range scenes, and sometimes use the AE-Lock to achieve my goals.

While it is true there are not many of us, you can be pretty sure we are some of the best!

Flink

I'm happy for you, but underexposed images (easily fixed in Paint Shop Pro) is a common subject on this forum and also DPreview.

As I said earlier, I'm very happy with the camera even with this minor annoyance.

Cheers
Tony

I have found pictures taken in RAW format seem to be slightly underexposed compared to ones taken in JPG. But I prefer the flexibility of RAW and it's easy to fix in software anyway (I use photoshop elements).

That aspect ratio difference has changed my viewpoint (sic) as well .

As others have said, a slight "lift" in Paint Shop Pro certainly helps many images.

I am just getting back into photography again after many years away doing other things. I was always a Pentax man and was lured back when I saw the *istDS. I have only been using it for just over a week now but already find it a delight to use.

I have only been using the centre weighted metering as this is all that I had on the old Super A and find that with proper care the exposure on the shots I have taken so far is spot on. I was interested to know how the dynamic range compared with film so I dug out my old Kodak grey card and took shots 4 stops under to 4 stops over exposed. Both the histogram on the camera and in Photoshop show that the metering is very accurate. This also showed just how good the auoto white balance is.

I have no experience with other DSLR’s but am amazed with the quality of the results from the DS. If you are getting dark images I would suggest you check the way you are using the metering when taking the shot.

Cheers,
Dave.

So you've had your *ist DS for a whole week and you have the answer to the dark images issue already? Well done, I've had my *ist D for 21 months and with 50 years of experience with various cameras I still cannot reliably predict which scenes are likely to come out dark and which will be normal.

You could always get an incident light meter, they're accurate and don't involve using the camera's meter.

I've been using Sekonic light meters for years. I think my MX has a meter, but I haven't used it in years. Even with digital, I trust the external meter a lot more than the camera meter!

Nobody has the perfect solution (see above)


I use a Seconic meter, or if I use the camera's "multi segment" meter I always check the histogram right away. Center weighted metering is a lot more predictable, I use the *st D with center weighted metering just like my MX and it all comes out fine.

No multisegment computerized meter is going to work perfectly, it's just a silly gimmick for lazy photographers. I think Nikon started it, and everyone else followed along.

Get yourself a decent Sekonic meter, and learn how to use ambient metering, or set the camera for center-weighted. It's a lot more predictable!

Of course there is no such thing as "correct" metering anyway.

Do you want do see the details in the shadows and blow out the highhlights or the other way round.

These are exactly the same choices that photographers have been making for many years - at the point of exposure there's only one shutter speed and only one aperture ( I think the latest HP compacts can actually vary the exposure between parts of a scene -now there's the future of photography no need to worry about "dynamic range any more)

In the meantime we get it mostly right and correct in the darkroom by dodging and burning or in the computer with levels and curves.

On the whole, given that you can't save a blown highlight, I'd rather my DSLR tended towards underexposure rather than over - and I like the fact that the LCD can show the blown highlights in review.

Incident metering helps to get it right first time - I always used my Weston with invercone with my Rollei TLR (unsophisitcated metering anyway) but that's fine with slow and considered photography. For the modern world - my high speed kid for example TTL metering is a boon.

Having said all that, I would say that my iST DS doesn't generally underexpose by a whole stop anyway - 1/2 a stop if that.

I too have recently got an istds , i am fairly happy with the results but know what you mean about darkness , it does require 1/2 normally for me too. The one problem i have got however is the viewfinder , after only two weeks it has started to blur ? , the pictures are fine so no ccd problem , i have bought a zeiss cleaning kit , and removed and cleaned the mirrors , but still it is not as clear as whn i first got it , its only obvious in bright light so dont see it all the time and it looks vaguely similar to a water mark left when water is not dried off properly , the question is , where on earth is it ?? , any help ??

I presume you have adjusted the dioptre adjustment on the viewfinder?