No

The exposure issue is there because you have backlighting. The diffused sunlight through the trees behind is "confusing" the camera into thinking it needs to expose for that. It doesn't know there's a little bird in front!

Best option in these situations where the scene is basically static and the lighting doesn't change much - use manual

Matt

Ok - I've had a quick look, and like Peter have these comments and recommendations:

1. The ISO1600 image was about 1Ev underexposed. Effectively the noise is the same as a good exposure taken at ISO3200.
2. The ISO800 image was nearly 2Ev underexposed. Effectively the noise is the same as a good exposure taken at ISO3200.

So, you've pretty much got the same kind of noise in both

Looking at the scenes I would recommend shooting in manual mode - take some sample shots and check the histogram (not worrying about the blown out sky behind - or reposition yourself). Either that or use some Ev compensation.

The other problem you have is that you are too far away and I expect you are needing to crop to almost 1:1 to get anything decent! I'd suggest going closer to the subject - if the birds filled the frame then you wouldn't worry nearly so much about the noise.

So - the noise levels are what I'd expect from the K20D (and in normal circumstances are perfectly acceptable for even large prints in the real world). However, as stated you are pushing both the exposure and crop which is exacerbating the noise issue

HTH!
Matt

Noise removal in RAW conversion software varies immensely.
I have perfectly acceptable results with Silkypix at up to ISO2500. Some noise, yes, but definitely acceptable. I have a lovely 18"x12" print taken at ISO3200 from the K20D.

I'll try and dig out a scan of Fuji ISO 1600 film to show what noise really was like

(Might check out your image later...)

Matt

For me - yes I need the knowledge.
For others - maybe not.

When using auto-scene modes there will always be situations where the camera gets it "wrong". In other words, the photographer and the camera don't see the artist side "eye-to-eye" For someone who just uses auto modes they'll experience frustration, blaming the camera for making the wrong choice (and not knowing how to change the situation).

For those who are comfortable taking complete control there is no problem - the camera isn't making the decision at all. Or, with Pentax gear, you can let the camera make the decisions most of the time and instantaneously override the camera (with hyper-program etc) and take control - which is one thing I really appreciate about the UI of the K20D etc.

Perhaps that's why Pentax has been slammed in the past. Maybe other makes handle auto modes better Take the flash system for example. Other systems may produce better "out the box" flash exposures. But it doesn't take much knowledge to get complete control with Pentax - and then you can wipe the floor with all those using auto modes

I'd much rather be in control of things and know what I should do to get the result
(Control freak that I am )

Matt

Nice to see you back viewfinder
Matt

Yeah. They were "ho hum" ok. But there was a shot of guys on a rock - the bloke on the far left is so fuzzed by the lens he looks like he's just been beamed down from the USS Enterprise

And going back to the original question... I'm waiting. The K20D + DA*50-135 is definitely floating my boat at the moment, and an iMac/MacBook/MacBook Pro is first on the shopping list (Can't decide what to do, but I'll probably wait until Snow Leopard is out, and after I've wrangled over what to do with all my licensed software )

Glad the MBP is suiting you Unlocker
Matt

...and checking out Apple's Aperture on a nice Power Mac with Wacom Cintiq I noticed an image taken with the Canon 5D + L16-35/2.8 (IIRC) - shockingly decentered, with some really nasty distortion on the left edges (i.e. very smeary person)
And that was presumably an image chosen to show off the setup!

Glad I'm using a Pentax

Matt

Looks like the 77 has a deeper set front element, and this looks wider too
See : http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/short-tele/FA77f1.8.html
Matt

Even if you have Photoshop Elements you can do it like this:

1. Add a new blank layer
2. Change the layer blend mode from Normal to "Soft Light"
3. Pick a soft white brush, opacity around 10%
4. Paint on the new layer - painting white will lighten, painting black will darken.

Easy-peasy And you can click the layer visibility to check the before/after.

Matt

I work in 16-bit when I need to do serious PP. When "pushing" an 8-bit file too far you can get unwanted posterisation.
Still, I always work with layers, so even if I work on an 8-bit and find it's going pear shaped, then I can reprocess the RAW file into 16-bit and pull all the layers onto the new 16-bit file.

It's quicker to work in 8-bit, and usually it's just fine
Matt