Love it! I especially like the nice slightly blue sky tone - so many night shots end up with a sort of murky browny/yellow sky that's not natural at all. Perhaps you could give the sky a bit of extra noise reduction. But well done here, its a very eye-catching image

Lovely bright colours, great squirrel action! I'd reduce the contrast on them all just a little - the range is quite high from blacks to whites, and doing this should produce a softer effect.

You might have got a little higher shutter speed (which would have helped with the squirrels) if you set a little minus exposure compensation (in Av mode) - this might have been OK or you could have boosted brightness again later on the computer.

I'd never have guessed.

That last one looks very much like a Pull Up Pull Up Pull Up situation Hope you made it over the threshold. No 2 is the best for me - so close to those buildings and lovely colours in them all.

Its so new its not made it into the guidebooks yet - I can just imagine a new chapter in the 'Digital Photography for Photographers' book and its like ..... 'Chapter 8 - Anti-Aliasing Capture Filtering & Other In-Camera Image Defect-Management operations' ... hmmm, that sounds good, I think I'd like to write the guide to all that stuff myself

Anyway ... what would the advice be? Check the LCD screen after shooting with the filter off? Learn what to look at most closely for signs of Moire? There's lots of potential there ... lets hope they also recommend readers go and buy a Pentax K3

I love my blues ... happy to be guilty as charged Yes, I'll get back here soon, on my own, and with the tripod and all the lenses and try and do it full justice. Just wanted to show everyone what this little corner of the world is like - my mini mountains

had to laugh at that - sounds like that constant comment I hear from non photographers ... 'ah, you must have a very good camera, is it expensive?'

Well, we're definitely focusing minds here now Jules . Expose to the right I guess will head towards blown highlights of course. From what I have gathered from other user reports the big 'thing' of the K5 series was shadow detail recovery - so you could shoot at 'average reflectance', keeping an eye on your highs, and pull up the shadows successfully later. This is certainly what I do with the K7 - I agree, I'd rather pull up what I can from black, and sacrifice what I can't, than have no come-back from blown whites. Other users have reported better performance in this respect from the K3 I think?

I'd be cautious using the camera histogram to assess the highs though - it is showing you the graph for the processed JPEG - even in RAW only its still a processed small embedded JPEG. This has got automatic DR compression, and it can be quite severe at the upper end - JPEG shooters will often believe that the DR of the scene is less than it really is for this reason - they're seeing the results post processing.

I'll give a plug to 135mm as well. I have an old 70's Tamron Adaptall 135 f2.8 which does the job. The perspective at this length is beautiful, and it can be advantageous to be further back - perhaps not in the studio, but out and about it works and makes moving around easier.

here's a couple of my examples -

I can understand this - do you mean the EV changes even when the lighting levels remain exactly the same, like in a studio?




Exactly what I was saying about a workable file - but I was talking earlier about metering being about pitching the mid-tone where you need it, and that varying from shot to shot & camera to camera - you really seem to be talking about the K3's wide dynamic range giving you more DR around the metered point, not the meter accuracy.