Thanks, I'll try and take the precaution especially if the exposure times are long.

Thanks for those quick responses So, Smeggy, it has affected the metering. Do you remember what the effect was? John is saying that the risk is of some kind of light interference causing bands - I suppose this might be a bit like flare? I imagine the light would be reflected around the prism and could end up entering the sensor.

So it is a significant issue on Pentax DSLRs then? In my particular situation the other night, I had to be a good way away from the camera, and the shutters speeds were in the 30th - 90th sec range. Luckily I didn't see any poor effects, and the brightness of the images were as I expected. But it sounds like you are saying that the viewfinder cover should ideally be used.

I have a question about the need for a viewfinder cover on our Pentax DSLRs (a K7 in my case). I was out on the hills the other evening, catching the last of the sunshine, and I ended up with a shot directly lit from the sun almost straight on from behind me. I was working with camera on tripod, and using remote control.

The problem was that my own shadow was in the frame when standing behind the camera, so I needed to move about 10 feet off to the left. I had been using mirror up with the remote control, but it was out of range at the required distance to keep my shadow out of shot. So I had to use the timer - 12 second option. I just pressed the shutter and walked away (focus was manual).

But I could see the sun shining into the viewfinder, and I remember always reading in books that this can mess up the metering, so you need to cover the viewfinder. But then I was thinking, no I metered the shot when I was at the camera and the viewfinder was in shadow. Once I press the shutter and the timer starts, the aperture & shutter settings are not going to change are they? I was working in Av and M modes. So I left it, and saw no issues with the exposures.

But the K7 was provided with a viewfinder cover, so I'm wondering in what situations or modes would it be necessary? Any experiences and further knowledge would be much appreciated.

Very impressive frame-filling bird action! 4 & 7 are special for me, 4 for the unique pose and 7 for the bits of out-of-focus elements around the bird, giving a sense of its environment and depth.

I guess it was worth a try. AFAIK setting the Highlight Correction (or any other parameter) on the camera simply stores the metadata for application once the file is opened in PDCU, and it will be applied and processed by the camera when generating the JPEG preview you see on the LCD (and also for any output JPEGs from the camera).

Its only metadata, so won't make any difference to the RAW file at all. You can go ahead in PDCU and make any adjustments. There is greater fine control and more options in the software though. I'm surprised you didn't have success with this highlight correction though. Once you've set the DR increase try changing the High / Low one - this alters the bias over the range of highs.

But, clearly this area is very overexposed, so the HDR was the best option I think.

Completely. Just so long as you don't elevate your own authority over the Authorities - then you become unpopular.

I think this is counter-intuitive. M mode holds a constant aperture and shutter speed. ISO would normally remain fixed as well in M. Obviously the exposures could be bracketed then by the iso changing, but I haven't tried it to see if this is what happens.

But clearly, quality - wise, the only variable it makes sense to adjust during exposure bracketing for HDR is shutter speed - so Av mode is the clear choice. As I think John has said, M mode would be for when you want to pause between brackets and change the shutter speed yourself. But then that's not 'auto bracketing!'.

I always try and take the auto route - I want the shots fired off as fast as possible to reduce the possibility of anything moving significantly during the process.

Regarding the blacks - I made the suggestion because I thought the shadow areas in the church looked a little 'hazy', a sign of low contrast. Raising the black point should add some base to the shadow range generally and firm up the contrast, which should give better definition throughout those areas of the shot.

I wouldn't worry about throwing away a bit at the very blackest black parts - its not like clipped highs which look bad on digital, clipped blacks in small doses should still look natural, and its in a good cause if it gives you that base and firmer contrast I was on about. You've gathered the data from the brackets firstly - now you have the latitude to throw a bit away!

And finally, about the clipped highlights. If you end up with a single shot that needs substantial 'recovery', give Pentax Digital Camera Utility 4.0 a go - its Highlight Adjustment' tab provides great power and sophistication to this brightest zone, you might be surprised at how good the results can be even with so many stops over. I've given some more details on its use the guide I wrote some time ago... link

The boat itself would be a breeze to clone into a new spot - the problem would be the telltale wake which would remain in front of it. You'd have to wipe this out as well. Done delicately it should look OK.

I love the 3rd. It has the feel of an old slide photo, very nostalgic. Sky is spectacular.

Could the foreground sand maybe take a half stop brightness reduction?

Joining up the dots is usually the problem when looking for comparative information in reviews - so for example, in his reviews of competing products we wouldn't expect the person to specifically state 'and during the entire testing the card and battery doors remained firmly closed' (assuming they did!)

Where there is specific side by side technical analysis (like charts or graphs) then fair enough. But a lot of the time this kind of thing is wiped out by a random selection of 'conclusion' pros and cons not at all related side by side : 'The best performance and handling in the group let down by the lack of printed full colour box opening instructions'

You're right Smeggy, people have the option to 'join the dots' and come onto this forum if they're thinking of coming to Pentax, and asking the questions. But unfortunately many, if not most, would take the bias and 'authority' of the review they read at face value