Very good. But what is it???

Steve

They're often the best when wildlife is involved... hang around and grab whatever turns up.

Steve

OK, I think I understand what you're doing now. First the good(-ish) news - it isn't what I was doing, so ignore what I said about all settings being retained by quick dial. Now the bad (for you) news. User 1, 2 and 3 are for camera settings for what the Q's user manual calls 'Image Finishing Tone' i.e. custom image, digital filter and smart effect. That does not include aspect ratio (that's under 'File Format'). It seems that the quick dial can be used to switch between these settings, or aspect ratio, but not both simultaneously. The easiest way to change both image finishing tone settings and aspect ratio is probably to do the former with the quick dial and the latter by pressing the info button, selecting aspect ratio and changing with the e-dial.

I must admit that user manual isn't as clear as it should be re User 1, 2 and 3. The seem a bit of an afterthough by Pentax, extra functionality but not as well integrated as they could be.

I no longer use quick dial myself, shoot DNG and do everything in post processing seems easier and safer. But then I've never been tempted by fancy things like the toy camera look.

Good luck!

Steve

Just checked my Q. I did what it says in the manual and all settings including aspect ratio are stored and retained correctly by quick dial. So.... the usual question. Are you using the latest firmware?

Steve

Do you mean the mode dial which is on the top of the camera (P/Tv/Av/M etc.) or the Quick Dial thingy which is on the front of the camera??

Steve

Yes, the last one for the light. And No. 4 for the position and pose of the hoverfly. To my eyes, the point of attention in No. 4 is the gap between the hoverfly's front legs and the anther - perhaps crop a little off the top of the picture to make it more central?

Steve

A pleasure. Particularly in comparison with the shifting and repairing of the compost heap that I'd been doing earlier in the day.

Steve

According to PP's owners (Bauer Media), average issue circulation Jan - Jun 2019 was 36,915 (Source: ABC Jan – Jun 2019). ABC gives Jan - Dec 2019 circulation per issue 32,860. That's a big drop over the year, and doesn't include the impact of Covid-19. For comparison, Amateur Photographer average issue circulation Jan - Dec 2019 was 13,144 (that's weekly so about 55,000/month). And the Beano averaged 41,891 for Jun - Dec 2019 (also weekly, so over 165,000 per month).

And PP's readership? Bauer Media says:
On average aged 48 years old.
Are mostly male (With a 86% - 14% split).
Earn an average 34k per annum.
Combined, they spent £188 million on gear in the last year.
The average reader has had an interest in traditional photography for 18yrs, and Interested in digital photography for 4 years.

Anyone admit to being the average reader? Including spending £5K (15% of income) per year on gear?

Aren't numbers interesting!

Steve

Not done yesterday. But just done it this evening. Same set up, same process, light similar but got a bit brighter after test shots to choose today's base exposure (1/13 sec) so images are lighter than yesterday, also some variation between subsequent shots (why do clouds have to move??? :evil.

Here is the base image. Noise much as in yesterday's base (allowing for overall brighter image).



Now underexposed by 4 stops with 4 stops added in post processing to bring the average brightnesss up to base level. Noise much as in yesterday's equivalent (allowing for overall brighter image).



Now increasing the in-camera sensitivity from ISO200 to ISO3200 to compensate for the reduced exposure time. And the result is (wait for it ... hushed expectancy ... big drum roll ...)



Yes, allowing for slight change in overall brightness due to slight change in light between shots, noise is essentially the same as when compensating for exposure in post processing. And that's as it should be, if my understanding of RAW and ISO is correct. Changing ISO doesn't change the output from the sensor so the ratio of noise to signal (light level) is unchanged. Increasing ISO affects downstream processing by amplifying the combination of noise and signal from the sensor, so the result should be the same whether done in camera or on computer. In fact, I'm not sure whether changing ISO actually changes RAW data or whether ISA is merely a number in the RAW file that is then used by post processing software to get the intended brightness. If the latter, it would be equivalent to me telling the software to increase exposure by 4 stops. Either way, the noise looks the same whether ISO is changed in camera or exposure is changed in post processing. Of course, this only applies if using RAW files, jpegs straight from camera will have lots of processing done already, including accounting for ISO.

As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Steve

And now a vote for the original version! The top bit gives a sense of depth, my eye starts with the hinge and is then drawn towards the 'distant view' at the the top. With the crop, my eye just stops at the hinge. Depends what you want and what you like.

Steve