I have found this discussion to be interesting, but I feel the original question has been left far behind. We were asked for advice on how to correct 'dark' backgrounds when shooting, and whether to use EC or ISO settings. As a new and enthusiastic Pentax owner I want to help those newer to photography to get what they want out of their Pentax as easily as possible.

The member said he thought it was too dark, so that is his own personal assessment of his photos - he wants them brighter. So he's the judge of this. I want to help him get them brighter on his camera!

I made a couple of posts a page or so ago giving what I hoped would be practical and easily absorbed guidance. What do others think about these ideas for our newer photographer? are there any other settings or things he could try on his camera (I know he could recompose and meter from a different part of the scene, but I think first steps first!)

Sorry, one other point - python118 asked about the ISO setting. Ths ISO setting does not affect the exposure value (EV) of the photo - it is this value that we are talking about. The only setting you can apply on the camera that changes the exposure value directly is the exposure compensation control, which you were right to focus on.

While you are experimenting with this control, I would suggest letting your camera worry about the ISO. Set the camera to auto iso for this - on my K7 I would press the info button to bring up the control panel, select the auto iso button (near the top left) and I would suggest setting the range of this to 200 - 800. This limits the auto setting of the camera to these outer extremes, and for general photography this should produce an acceptable iso setting for all your shots. Also set the mode dial to P. (Don't forget that your exposure compensation settings will not work if your use the green square setting, I think).

Once you have got to grips with good control over your exposures, then check out the sections in that photography book on ISO and how to use this to advantage.

I'm just looking back at what python118 asked specifically, and my advice would have a look through a good digital photography book at the sections dealing with exposure matters.

Immediately, if images are too dark (or bright) in areas, I would activate the warnings for this on the LCD display - go to the 'playback' tab in the menu, and find the 'shadow / highlight warning' box and put a tick. After taking a photo press the play button and the picture will be on the screen - if there are flashing patches of yellow then these parts of your shot are too dark to contain any detail. (I accept that creatively someone may choose to keep this, but in general this would suggest the photo could benefit from more exposure)

If there are flashing patches of red then these parts of the shot are too bright to contain any detail. If there are both yellow and red patches flashing then you need to think about the image and decide what parts are more important. Too bright 'highlights' (the red patches) are normally acceptable if they are only on 'hotspots' - for example the brightest corners of a very white cloud, or a shining piece on a polished chrome car bumper. If they are more dominant, say the whole cloud is flashing, then you need minus exposure compensation. Try -0.5 (half a stop in photography terms)and shoot again. if still too much red flashing then try -1.0.

If you are worried about dark areas and there is yellow flashing in those parts, then set + compensation - try +0.5 and then +1.0 if needed. You can go further if you want, but for most shots goping beyond +1.5 or 2.0 will just push the brighter parts of you photo too much, meaning you'll get more 'red flashes' showing too bright area. So it will end up being a compromise.

Once you've got used to controlling the basic exposure settings of your photos by this method and not seeing the very dark areas, you can think about and learn about the issues that others have talked about here - such as when to use exposure compensation to correct for the camera meter's limitations and to use exposure setting for a specific creative effect.

I find very few of my images, when looked at closely enough, that wouldn't benefit from some degree of 'De-Noiseing', although it is never a uniform amount needed across the whole photo. For that reason the software used needs a fair amount of selective and fine control, so you can put the emphasis onto, say, the shadow areas or yellow colour noise etc.

I think this is true regardless of the camera, sensor, or subject matter. So a good flexible software solution that can deal with all situations is a good thing to have. The Topaz product was mentioned above, and its what I use as first choice. It has the fine control and selective targeting required, but for me at least, it is the most economic option as I don't use lightroom.

I run the Topaz plugin through Photoshop Elements 8, its a 64bit version, and great value. It can 'plug-in' to the full photoshop as well. I don't think you need lightroom just for 'de-noiseing'.

And I suggest setting the focus mode selector to 'm'.

I wouldn't discount the use of quality DVDs. They have the advantage of offering a wide range of storage options, totally flexible, such as many different case or sleeve sizes, splitting them into different locations etc.

The main degradation that I have heard can affect these is caused by the use of cheap or the wrong type of marker pen to write on them. But there are software solutions that can aid in increasing reliability also, certainly beyond the normal lifespan of a hard drive.

I have been using DL (double layer) dvds, 8gb each, which is a very practical amount of space per disk when backing up photos. I have been using Maxell DL discs, not expensive, but they have a quality gold surface to resist ink absorption,and my Nero Burning Rom software offers a 'securedisc' feature. This offers a 'data integrity check' giving warning of when it would be a good time make another backup. Heres their webpage with some explanation of this link.

I would like to refer you to an earlier discussion that I started on this topic, following on from the suggestion of the Samyang 14mm. There were some good points made concerning the distortion issues. link

If value for money is an overiding factor (for me it is)then the Samyang remains a contender. I havn't put my 'money where my mouth is' yet - I'm trying to find anywhere that I can try out the lense on my K7 - but on balance, looking at the evidence in writing, the newer 2nd generation of this lense would be a nice bit of kit to have.

Thanks Silverfox, do you know if your Samyang 14mm was a 1st or 2nd generation? I'm still sorely tempted - certainly on balance looking at reviews and the comments so far here, it is a very enticing option at the budget end. It doesn't sound like this involves any compromises on the sharpness, build quality and usability fronts.

Is it true that it has an aperture ring, and there is an 'A' setting?

I'm not very hopeful of being able to walk in to a shop and try one - might have to hope a mail order outfit will send it and allow a return. I do like building shots, but it'll mostly be out and about in the hills and valleys, so I'm planning to brush up on software options to minimise the distortions.

Thanks everyone. I'd better read a few more reports. The lenstip.com review makes the distinction between a 1st and 2nd generation of the 14mm, and they say that there is a big improvement over the first released models. In fact they make pretty impressive claims about the lenses sharpness and resolving abilities compared to top Nikon kit, althought the barrel distortion is still present in good quantites. Maybe some people have experienced the earlier models?

Based on what we were saying in the other section (on lens corrections in camera and with raw converters) if I get this Samyang I had better learn more about processing distortion corrections.

I didn't understand the quote from Ken Rockwell when he says it will be worse if not on full frame. Surely on full frame the edge distortions will be more apparent than on APS-C where you will be only seeing the image from the best parts of the glass? The graphical depictions of the lens distortions on the lenstip.com article show a marked increase in the distorions at the very edges right the way around, and a smoother gradation in the centre. On APS-C I don't think you'll be viewing these outer parts of the image.

I'm still tempted.

I have recently joined the forum, and on my wishlist was a wide angle prime (14 -15mm). I had thought I might try and find one of the old manual lenses of this type, but in another discussion Pentaxophile mentioned a 14mm by Samyang (Korean). I checked it out on Lenstip.com where it gets a good recommendation - link, so for a budget item it looks quite attractive.

I would love to hear if any Pentax user has any experience with this lense. It apparently has an 'A' setting for Pentax, which would be most convenient. Its manual focus, but I doubt that this matters at this focal length. Any comments or user feedback would be much appreciated!