Hi Adam, there are probably a few things you could do:

- Shoot at a wider aperture; you don't need F14 or F16 for this type of shot unless you have very close objects that need to be pin-sharp. On a wide-ish lens you'll find that F7.1 or F8 is usually ample and this will help keep the ISO low - the lower the ISO the greater the dynamic range you can squeeze out, also your lens will perform better at F8

- Have you adjusted the levels to maximise the range?

- Did you use a ND Grad filter? A quality one will always help to balance bright skies and darker ground - take a look at PUMA's images and you will see what I mean

- A polariser will sometimes help, but the light probably needs to be a bit better than you had

Best wishes
David

If it was dark, even a K-5 will struggle! Try using flash turned down a bit and a slow shutter speed of 1/25 or so (switch on slow synch in the flash settings). RAW images retail a mass of original data so you can change the sharpening, white balance etc. in post processing, or you can even retrieve colour back from a RAW image shot in camera with BW set!

You will need to reduce noise sometimes, the higher the ISO, the more noise and this is magnified in dark environments. RAW does not make you immune from image noise as this is generated by the sensor as it attempts to retrieve details from under-exposed areas.

Many people choose to shoot in JPEG as it is less work (camera does more processing), but I prefer RAW. It's a personal choice and neither is right or wrong.

Regards
David

We're all pretty harmless on here and you'll usually get some decent advice from most questions

Best wishes
David

Have you had a look at Foliopic? Quite a few of the PU members use it and it has a very easily configured 'shop' option that allows you to sell prints and / or digital files.

Regards
David

For me, the original is the best of the bunch. I'm not sure what settings were used, but to me they all look a little flat and lacking in colour / dynamic range. Are they a bit under-exposed?

Regards
David

You're going down a slippery slope! Modern DSLR's and software are great for recovering errors, but there's still no substitute for getting it right in the first place. Also, if you're getting lazy about F stops and ISO, what about the composition?

Go out with a tripod and take your time about what you shoot!

Regards
David

I also would not recommend upgrading the K-x to the K-r. In performance terms they will be almost the same, maybe the K-r is marginally better in low light, but this will be negligible as the sensor in the K-x is already excellent in this regard.

I noted your reference to 'focus issues' with the K-x. I too have had issues with my first one, although the second one I bought has not been a problem. Manufacturing tolerances are not that tight and also the AF system on the K-x has a wider potential for error than say the K-5. Did you know you can download a menu hack to access the hidden K-x 'Debug Menu'? With this you can adjust the AF for forward or backwards focussing and this can make a massive difference. See link below:

link

The K-x is a brilliant camera and I would only consider upgrading to a K-5, or K-30 at the very least.

Regards
David

Not sure about the thread in this post Tom, but I really like the design of your website. Very modern and fresh looking.

Regards
David

The learning curve is not too steep, but to get the best from a K-5 you need to take your photography fairly seriously. Some of the better togs / more professional members on the site will be able to demonstrate this better than me, but I do enjoy the K-5 and wouldn't hesitate to buy another one.

Regards
David

I've sent you a PM Nuri, I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying here. I value comments from you and everyone else, the quote above was what someone else had said about Gallery commments in a previous Forum post, not what I think!

Hope this clears up any confusion and possible hurt caused.

Regards
David