K10D Light Meter

I purchased my first Pentax SLR camera back in 1974, a Spotmatic II, I still have this camera and it is still in perfect working condition (one service only). The light meter on this camera is very accurate. So when it was time to upgrade to a digital SLR, the choice was very simple, a K10D. I have had this camera now for approx sixteen months. But I am very disappointed with the light meter in this camera, manual adjustment
necessary before or after nearly every exposure. I also have a Canon Power Shot 640 compact. The light meter on this camera out performs the K10D, by a factor of ten. Anyone's guess which make of camera I will go for if I upgrade again, even though it will mean buying another ste of lens.

Olympus?

What kind of lenses are you using Chris? Are these K or M lenses? Or regular KAF lenses?

Martin.

If you were using colour print film, then the meter of the Spotmatic could have been out by a couple of stops in either direction, and you would not have known.

Point and shoot cameras are given lots of processing in-camera to compensate for bad technique. It is not at all impossible that the meter of your P&S is no better than the K10D's, but that the end-results have been corrected for you.

Are you sure you are not using a metering method (like Spot) which is not appropriate to what you are photographing?

I find I get the best results by having my cameras permanently set to increase exposure by 0.7 of a stop.

Of course, you might have a faulty camera.

But in 90% of cases of alleged equipment problems, the photographer is to blame. Since most other people seem to be able to manage with their K10Ds, perhaps you should check out this angle first.

But if you are convinced you are not at fault, I suggest you go over to DPReview, which is a forum for perfect photographers with defective equipment. They can advise on your best course of action.

G

I wonder if there are not a whole mass of people who buy DSLRs and are then disappointed in one way or another, simply because the rest of the workflow has not been thought out. DSLR images need after-work to get all the qulity out of the images.

Probably many would be better off with a Bridge camera. The images from these are much more print-ready and the built in lenses can cover from 28mm - 480mm (35mm-equivalent) without any need to agonise over lens choice.

I use one for eBay pictures, set at 3MP resolution. It works well and has good macro capability. It's not good enough for general use though, but then I need big prints.

Actually I have been toying with buying the new Panasonic FZ28 bridge camera, it seems to have a pretty good spec for ther money.
I was thinking of buying one for just keeping in the car and when I take to dog over the forest to save me lugging the K10D and a couple of lenses over there twice a day .. just in case I miss something.

But then that sort of defeats the object me buying the K10D to start with.

Maybe not completely. It's always handy to have a backup camera for occasions when you don't want to carry bulky kit or maybe if you're not sure that you'll be taking any photos at all.

Taking a full kit everywhere all the time can be a bit of a burden...it is supposed to be fun!

I almost bought a casio. last month. stuck with a sony video cam, the sr12, because the video matches my hdr hc1, which makes editing cutaways easier..... but it was a close call.

Dumb question of the day:

Presumably the dSLR is on one side of the bridge.

What's on the other?

A frustrated photographer who has to go all the way back to collect it?

:

A compact camera.

Ah. That makes sense. Cheers.

I have the identical cameras you have. For the 10D I have always used a hand held meter with the camera on manual. I have worked that way from the days of film to now. Hardly think its the camera that's at fault which may need setting up for the way you work.

The best in camera metering system was the LX, the only camera I ever had any faith in.