Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 25, 2006, 2:13 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 49
Default

I'm trying to decide whether to buy the k100 or to buy a canon rebel 300 body
and a nice lense. I'm favoring the k100. But another web review site's forum
page listed the following critic lastly on it's k100 forum section:
1. low indoor and tungsten automatic white balances unacceptably yellow
2. White balance is useless in manual mode. ie: Cloudy setting, grass looks
yellow instead of green. Daylight setting, brown leaves look grey.
3. Flouresecent light settings are useless.
4. When whites look white, colors of everything else looks wrong.
5. Pictures look great on the lcd screen, but on the computer monitor they look
crappie (his words). Wouldn't this be a very important issue?
6. He just puts white balance on automatic and hopes he never has to shoot
white or light yellow.

Can someone please address any of these issues?

This is my first entry in a forum page. Loves Steve's review of the k100. Am very
impressed with the level headed comments of Pentax users.
chacha is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 25, 2006, 4:05 AM   #2
TC3
Senior Member
 
TC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,169
Default

While the WB can cause a slight yellow cast when indoor pics are taken in avaliable light i have never had any other problem with the WB and in normal conditions just leave it on auto if shooting JPEG. A lot of cameras will have trouble with white balance in indoor avaliable light. It is easy to overcome. Use the custom setting to set the white balance or do as i do and just shoot in RAW and adjust the WB after.

I am totally satisfied with the K100D despite the moaning of certain individuals who do not realise there is no perfect camera! Even if there was they would still find something to grumble about!:roll:


TC3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 5:07 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
philneast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hobart Tasmania
Posts: 489
Default

I have been very happy with the white balasnce performance of my DS in over a year of use.


Even in RAW mode I rarely have even contemplated changing the colour temperature of the images that the camera has chosen.

It is possible to set the colour temperature manually, but I have never got past the heading in the manual as I have never looke dlike needing it.


Under tungsten, flourescent and mixtures of artificial light the printed images look true to colour.

Popular Photography & Imaging in a large comparative test rated the Pentax DS's colour accuracy as extremely high, particulalry when set to the Adobe colour space.

But I would be surprised if any DSLR does not produce excellent results under a variety of lighting conditions.
philneast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 5:07 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

I've never had a problem with WB either. If indoors, set it manually-I know this is a lot of trouble in the instant world of gratification, but if done manually, it works just fine, and is quite accurate......cheers........Don
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 5:14 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi chacha,

I've seen reference to this "problem" a number of times, and just don't get why it sticks. There really aren't any DSLR's that get tungsten light "right", and most people resort to using custom WB, RAW, or color correction in PP to make it good. The use of energy-saving flourescent "bulbs" compounds the problem by making the light even more strongly colored, but any good reviewer would note this and take it into consideration. This really shouldn't be a deal-breaking problem, and it's so easy to work around, that it should be a non-issue. Did he note what settigs were used when he shot his daylight and cloudy tests with the yellow grass and gray leaves? -- I would think not -- with the adjustability of digital cameras, all these variables come into play, and must be noted for the review to have any credibility.

I don't have a K100D, but have read a number of professional reviews and hands-on previews, and WB has not been much of an issue in these. If the "review" that you're quoting is by a user, I would submit that it was from a very inexperienced one and should not be given much weight. Another reason is that there are many very satisfied users of K100Ds in the forums that I read regularly and I'll take their word over this one "reviewer" any day. I also don't believe any manufacturer would put out a DSLR in this day and age with so major a flaw as to make it virtually unuseable. Something as bad as this "reviewer" says is much more likely a case of user error, or giving him the benefit of the doubt, a bad sample, than a flaw in the camera model in general. Of course, YMMV in the way that you think, so take what I'm writing for what it's worth. . .

The best review is to test drive the camera in the manner that you plan on using it. If it feels right in your hands, it's passed the first test. If you find it easy to understand and use, it's passed the second. Take some images, download them to your computer and see if the images meet your standards. Print them if that's what you plan on doing with your pictures. If it does what you want, then buy it, if it doesn't, move on. Any of the DSLRs available will take fantastic images. I personally wouldn't take anyone else's word as the final one to choose a camera for me.

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 7:31 AM   #6
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

DITTO, could not have said it better!

just look at the posts here.... do you see complaints??? look on other sites.. do you see complaints?? there will always be a nay sayer or two but look at the majority. we even have one here that puts down his own5 pentax bodies.. hmmm, guess some people never learn..

roy

snostorm wrote:

Quote:
Hi chacha,

I've seen reference to this "problem" a number of times, and just don't get why it sticks. There really aren't any DSLR's that get tungsten light "right", and most people resort to using custom WB, RAW, or color correction in PP to make it good. The use of energy-saving flourescent "bulbs" compounds the problem by making the light even more strongly colored, but any good reviewer would note this and take it into consideration. This really shouldn't be a deal-breaking problem, and it's so easy to work around, that it should be a non-issue. Did he note what settigs were used when he shot his daylight and cloudy tests with the yellow grass and gray leaves? -- I would think not -- with the adjustability of digital cameras, all these variables come into play, and must be noted for the review to have any credibility.

I don't have a K100D, but have read a number of professional reviews and hands-on previews, and WB has not been much of an issue in these. If the "review" that you're quoting is by a user, I would submit that it was from a very inexperienced one and should not be given much weight. Another reason is that there are many very satisfied users of K100Ds in the forums that I read regularly and I'll take their word over this one "reviewer" any day. I also don't believe any manufacturer would put out a DSLR in this day and age with so major a flaw as to make it virtually unuseable. Something as bad as this "reviewer" says is much more likely a case of user error, or giving him the benefit of the doubt, a bad sample, than a flaw in the camera model in general. Of course, YMMV in the way that you think, so take what I'm writing for what it's worth. . .

The best review is to test drive the camera in the manner that you plan on using it. If it feels right in your hands, it's passed the first test. If you find it easy to understand and use, it's passed the second. Take some images, download them to your computer and see if the images meet your standards. Print them if that's what you plan on doing with your pictures. If it does what you want, then buy it, if it doesn't, move on. Any of the DSLRs available will take fantastic images. I personally wouldn't take anyone else's word as the final one to choose a camera for me.

Scott
  Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 9:34 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
bobinoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 189
Default

Seems a bit ott to rehash the same issue (white balance)in 6 different ways.

In my experience, the auto modedoes leave ayellowish hint onindoor shots underartificial lightso Iusually change the wb to the tungsten setting which seems to work fine.

Recently been trying out RAW which allows you to adjust wb after the event if the need arises.

But to put in perspective, if I was choosing a camera again this would pale into insignificance against the great pictures you can getout ofthis camerawith the low cost / brilliant qualitylenses available - unless you're loaded I'd think hard about whether you can look past thisfactor.

I've never used a Canon but even if the photos were better you'd need to be making money from photography to consider paying Canon prices for lenses.

I am a novice, have nocreative talent for photography and amstill able to take photos that blow me away.

You do not have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce that, along with pretty much everyoneeveryone else on this forum, I love my (wife's)Pentax DSLR (K100D) and would recommend it without hesitation.




bobinoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 10:31 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 373
Default

I found that indoor photos get a yellowish cast when on Auto WB with my K100D.
Some can be corrected in software later.

What I was not able to do thou, was to get the same color temperature as my eye perceived at the time. By using an area in the photo that should have been white in daylight I get a too cold temperature cast, i.e. not how the eye perceived it under the artificial light.

I suppose that this is a common problem for this range of cameras. In RAW it should be much easier to fix. Next time I will try to set it un Tungsten.

Here is an example shot in JPEG that no matter what I do I cannot get the skin color right in software (maybe I need a better software?!).

Shot with FA 50mm F1.4 at F3.2, 1/10s, ISO-400, SR on.



Attached Images
 
DigitalAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 10:58 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 373
Default

Here is one that came out much better. No processing, shot around the same time
with FA 50mm F1.4, F2.8, 1/40s, ISO-400, SR on
Attached Images
 
DigitalAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 12:01 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

Here is your first photo with a bit of Photo filter (80A) added in CS2.



Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:55 AM.