Same old story - where is Pentax?

I think Remco's point is that other brands don't need one adjusting sharpness, contrast etc to produce photos people like. They really do do it straight out of camera.
I am not saying that those photos are better, but many people expect saturated, contrasty, sharp photos without having to make adjustments. That is the type of photo many people prefer.

All my Pentaxes underexpose. I am used to it, but it would be nice not to have to correct the exposure always.

The K50 and no doubt others as well can be set to record both RAW and JPEG of the same shot (RAW+); that way you can process a shot or not, whatever you choose. I don't always get such sharp pictures as I would like but that's due to my shortcomings and not the camera as with careful preparation they can be pin-sharp.

Gwyn wrote:

This is quite correct. In the B&W film era, the basic film consumer wanted high contrast negatives which were hard to print and gave the labs some problems.

The same seems to apply to colour. The digital mass consumer wants super sharp, high contrast images.

The whole idea of the subtle colors and more softer image seems mainly used by professionals who do advertising and and images of people and of photographs of Houses and internal rooms in this type of magazine.
They know, this type of images are pleasing to the eye.
This is really what its all about. The photo should reflect the mood and what one really sees.

When we look at harsh surroundings with blaring sunlight and deep shadows, t it may not be worth wasting a pixel.

As to Pentax underexposing and the fix to this , I can not agree with the remedy.

Setting the +- exposure correction to do this permanently does not appeal to me. Firstly, It clogs up the viewfinder and top display more and I don't think that's what it was intended to do. I think its intention was to compensate for taken images against some bright or dark object and then adjusting to make other objects visible which would have been hard to see otherwise.

A better solution would be to be able to do that in the Menu and set one or 2 stops more ore less.

Regards, Horst

A meter calibration function would be a good idea ...I agree that a permanently adjusted exposure compensation is not the logical use of that feature, and is counter-productive to efficient compensations which should always be referenced against the '0' point.

For me it is far preferable to have image processing defaults that are biased towards the neutral and more muted, lower contrast look. This applies to both camera processing and computer work, as it is better to make progressive increases in effect values rather than try and pull back from excessive strengths. ... This is doubly so for JPEGs where the results are 'baked in' from the start and there is real quality loss when trying to recover things.

The custom image pre-sets and fine adjustments provide all the variety and flexibity to reproduce a full range of photographic styles and genres accurately. .... We just need to actually use them and change them appropriately for each new situation if we want the results 'out of the camera'.

In my experience, Pentax does meter to preserve the highlights more aggressively than other brands.

What could help in this regard though is more information from Pentax around how to get the best from your shots. The manuals and indeed menus are littered with settings options, but there is very little overarching guidance given around what the intention was from the engineers. Focussing/tracking type setup is a classic for this, where forums are the best bet to see what others are having success with. Pentax themselves don't present as a useful resource in this regard.

Exposure depends on which metering mode you use, the effect you want to achieve, your personal preferences, your technique and (now it's digital with raw capture available) over a dozen other settings/options. As a photographer it's up to you to to understand your gear and how to express yourself with it. If it doesn't work for you, move on and use something else (there's no point using gear you don't understand or trust).

As for how popular Pentax gear is, I don't really care - I have more than I need and it suits the way I work better than the other options I've tried (otherwise I'd have moved on years ago).

John.

I used to have hammer which always bent nails....

With due respect I get that. What I'm saying is simply that Pentax typically produces a darker image straight out of the camera, straight out of the box with default settings than other brands. It's this JPEG output that gets compared often and an area that Pentax often gets knocked in.

I read a review recently about the K-S2, or maybe K-S1, damned if I can find it, and the same comment was made in that review. My angle here is people read those reviews, regardless of how naff they may be.

I process everything from my DSLR via lightroom from a RAW file. I personally couldn't care less about all of the in camera aids to develop JPGs, but there are an awful lot of them and agree that you should be able to tweak that lot to get something that matches what you have in mind.

Please also remember that the display on which you view your (Auto/JPG) Pentax photos has to be setup correctly before any serious judgement can be made.
Reviewers and consumers who complain that images are under/over exposed may in fact be doing so because their monitors are set too dark/bright.
Histograms can also be misleading (as can information about how they should look).

Yes, this is an issue, made worse by the fact that we don't have as much third party supporting material as the larger brands. Do an Amazon search for ' Flash Photography Books' and in amongst the usual generic books (although with their inevitable Nikon /Canon bias) you will find a number of brand specific books about the flash systems of the alternatives.

The older flash model has a manual that lists steps mainly ... It is a rather frustrating document in some ways and seems to convey a sense that you're approaching some things at a tangent. They redesigned the latest flashes beautifully .... but, bizarrely (IMO) chose to copy most of the old manual verbatim, just adding a bit about the new function menu, a lost opportunity I think.

In preparing the 2nd edition of my guide I and testing features I was amazed to find an entirely undocumented wireless feature for balancing and controlling light ratios in P-TTL. It's been used by people but is entirely missed in the manual. It's distinct from Contrast Control Sync (which is dealt with in the manual in the most clod-hopping way imaginable!) as CCS appears to be an extension cord feature only.

So I have had to literally write the manual for this wireless feature ... You'll soon have it, Wireless Lighting Ratio Control .. A new Pentax feature that's always been there!