I have enjoyed reading the Imaging Resource write-up linked just above - they clearly have a depth of knowledge of the Pentax range over the years and an eye for the details.

Being a lover of my camera controls, I was particularly interested in the developments in physical controls on the new K3 body. Firstly, the Movie mode & Live View options are a clear-cut leap forwards - there doesn't seem to be any pain from this gain.

The AutoFocus controls present a more complex situation - the new 27 point system now demands more fine control choices, and so the usability has changed also - here there may well be some 'pain' I think. The K7 / K5 have the advantage of simplicity - nothing easier than flicking the lever to the middle 'centre-point' position if there's any hunting or doubt,and the option of selecting a point is fairly intuitive, although apparently not much used I have heard.

Plus the simple mode lever for AF.S / AF.C / M is simplicity itself, and a breeze to make use of.

It is this practicality I wonder we may lose with the new system. The button press plus e-dial selection to move from single-shot to continuous is a few too many steps and fingers for me - plus in continuous mode you've now got options to set a range of coverage (3x3 / 5x5) around your pre-set focus point. Amazingly flexible, yes, but considering that most people seem to report here that they never select their focus point anyway, I wonder if this extra sophistication will prove to be very practical in real-life photography?

Many thanks DrO - I am glad that the colours have come over well following my monitor settings adjustments - as Smeggy said above, the 'Postcard Blues' - wow, like a postcard, what a compliment!

And I know that the location will reward further visits and I'll be prepared with different lens's. I should try wider views maybe and a variety of different crops.

Thanks again to everyone who have looked at helped here

Jim, you're right of course - the grass was very dry and I believe the tone I've got in my new versions is close to what it looked like. I can see now that the earlier versions were wrong, I think now because of the monitor settings, so I am glad to see that this has improved.

Thanks to everyone for the helpful advice above - I'm mainly concerned that I am achieving a more realistic and life-like depiction of the greens and yellows, and this is obviously not a fixed value - ot varies between locations, time of day and season, and overall brightness. I'm less concerned with the finer white balance tuning, which to a degree must be a personal preference.

In Mr B's version above I can now detect a magenta twinge, which is not natural, and in David's versions of the brick wall scene I still find the reds and yellows oversaturated. Its true that my new version looks a bit washed out, and I have deliberately reduced yellow saturation, but thats because I'm so scared now to have too much yellow in anything !

But its all been very good information which I'm sure will help in future. So thanks again to you all for taking the time to look at it.

I've been suffering from the colour blues lately, or more precisely the colour yellows, as many shots have had too strong yellows when seen on others monitors. 'Bizarre' and 'way off' have been some of the descriptions posted .

I have now made adjustments to my monitor settings- I found that the grey balance was really quite cool in tone which I was not aware of, so I've fixed that.

I have taken 3 recent images and started from scratch with the RAW again - using the exact same software, techniques & colour spaces, I have re-edited them and I post them here next to the original 'too yellow' versions. I see the colours on these new ones as good with my new monitor settings, so I just need to get the feedback that they are reproducing correctly on everyone elses monitors. I'd be very grateful if you could provide that feedback and comments.

Many thanks, Nigel



A. ORIGINAL VERSION






A. NEW VERSION






B. ORIGINAL VERSION





B. NEW VERSION






C. ORIGINAL VERSION






C. NEW VERSION





Thanks for your time in helping with this

Good to know I've got that insight! Its about the balance really here isn't it? Its certainly a tricky one to get right at capture, which is why I suggested the photographer might try a selection on the background and just tone it down a touch.

classic !

It cuts down refections and has a deepening effect on colours, especially blue skies. Because of the reduction in bright refections bouncing around (eg on water) you can see deeper into the water and the tones get more depth. Another effect would be on windows, where it will reduce or eliminate colour casts caused by nearby reflected light.

It will reduce exposure by 1.5 or 2 stops, so therefore will increase shutter speeds at a constant aperture, so would be useful for river scenes where you wanted a blurring water effect if it was too bright.

I don't think there's any questioning of all this - but it doesn't automatically mean that any particular photographer needs to upgrade to the latest camera, or that it should be their particular priority. There may be other items to buy that would offer better immediate value to an individual.

Steve, the full comment I made was a purely personal one, based on my own needs and situation at present, as an example ...I'm not trying to downplay the actual IQ differences between the cameras, which is clearly significant.

Circular Polarising Filter - the kind that you need to use on a DSLR. It can be a screw on type or the sort that fits onto a filter holder system, which is the most versatile.