K-5 In Camera HDR

We were at Little Moreton Hall today and I've just done a new EPZ blog showing some of the images. I was very impressed with the in camera HDR of the K-5, and I hadn't actually used it before. This scene had far too great a brightness range for the sensor, but switching in the HDR on the first step of three settings gave a very realistic result. The camera rattles off three exposures, blends them and even aligns if the box is selected.

Calling the feature "HDR" was probably a mistake IMO. That image has worked well and isn't HDR at all, it's simply exposure stacking order to bring up the shadows with less noise ) that would be far too dark had the scene been exposed to avoid clipping.

Had it not been called HDR I think more people would use it more often. I admit it put me off. it only works with JPGs IIRC.

This is my only example of in-camera HDR link, in my case there was no detail in the shadows (high key exposure) and very little in the highlights (low key).

It would be better if it wasn't restricted to JPEG, but I don't know if its possible to merge several raw images into a single raw image.

It's a pity the cams didn't offer a 16bit TIF output

I thought that was what HDR is at it's basic. Am I mistaken ?

It's what I see HDR for as well Mike. It brings a dynamic range that's far too wide under control so that it can be reproduced on screen or print. So, shadows that would turn black have detail.

That's what's happened with this shot, the straight shot just has totally black shadow areas.

I have used it a bit in a derelict mill in Oldham... wasn't over impressed

No you're not Mike

Most people view HDR photos as the acid trip effect type.

Just google image HDR photos and you'll see waht I mean.


It's also interesting that HDR and exposure stacking as per John's image is actually LDR as the dynamic range is reduced.

I can say that I tried to use HDR with the k5 once when I originally purchased the camera, didn't really know how the hell to use it and left it at the. Is the HDR after the 3 shots automatically blended by the camera or is the work required afterwards?

Its all done in the camera processor - it takes 3 actual exposures, like auto-bracketing, then does its stuff on them. The result is a single JPEG, compressing a wider captured dynamic range into a lower visible range. The lower setting is usually quite natural and effective - the higher setting is veering towards the 'acid trip' look a bit, mainly because the shadows are pulled up excessively. This creates a washed out contrast, but it doesn't add the excessive micro-contrast and gravelly texture of the full 'acid trip' in Smeggy's term, which is usually created on a computer in specialised HDR software.

Its how you use it of course - I've had a couple of shots on here recently that were HDR, but until it was spelled out no one had realised.

Hmmm tend to disagree a little with you there. I think there has been a trend to take it too far and do the "clown puke" type of HDR I loathe so much, but the actual technique of using different exposures was originally intended to cope with scenes with a very high dynamic range that could not be captured well with one exposure. It doesn't have to look like clown puke..just some seem to have taken it to that level as they consider it to look good (yes Puzzling I know)