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

View Poll Results: What White Balance Do You Use?
Auto WB 2 66.67%
Manual WB 1 33.33%
Fix on computer 0 0%
Voters: 3. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 25, 2008, 7:55 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,868
Default

I have seen in various forums how people adjust the White Balance when shooting.

Until now I had assumed that as I shoot in RAW, I can always correct it later.

However, I rarely get time now to spend hours PPing photos, so I would rather get them right in camera whereever possible.

With that in mind, I thought about buying an Expodisc. These are bery expensive, though, and supposing I didn't get on with it???

eBay, and Hong Kong, are your friends here, as usual. I bought a 67mm White Filter Cap http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...m=200252982682 for £2.20 incl delivery. At that price, if I didn't get on with it, I have lost nothing.

Played a little with it when it arrived, but last night, I tested it properly.

AWB



MWB



Both were shot using a macro lens and 2 flash guns.

Both are straight from the camera - no PP or resize.

While I am happy with both, the MWB one is certainly closer to what the rose looks like.


Based on this, I think I may be a MWB convert.


3+ years on this forum, and I am still learning and improving.


Thoughts on MWB please - who uses, who doesn't?



Dal



Dal1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 25, 2008, 8:40 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,868
Default

MWB - Cropped, saturated and contrast added







Dal
Dal1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 9:38 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

Dal,

I am a fan of MWB myself no matter what camera I use. The following example substantiates my preference as you have found. I don't shoot RAW for the very same reason as you. I don't have the time to PP as it seems many RAW shooters do. Once you get to know your tool of choice and know what settings to use for the style.

The use of the white balance disc I don't think takes into account of your using the strobes. That is my guess as to why it looks a bit more drab in comparison to MWB in camera. I may be way out in left field to my comment here but I am interested in the difference between using the disc with out the addition of a strobe and MWB.

Thanks for sharing your findings,

Tom
vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 10:43 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,868
Default

The AWB shot is just that - no filter disc used, and shot with 2 flash guns.

The MWB shot used the same setup, but used the filter disc first.

It took me a while to understand how to use the filter, as it comes with no instructions.


Basically, point towards the light-source (sun, lights etc) manual focus, and take the shot. This sets the white balance (if it doesn't work well, the camera won't accept it.

The strobes are the light source, so just make sure they fire when setting up.


Would have made shooting the cars at the motorshow a lot easier!!!



Dal
Dal1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 11:14 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi Dal,

I shoot mostly AWB, but I shoot predominantly outside, with natural light, so this setting works pretty well. I do chimp the first couple of shots to make sure the WB is at least close before continuing shooting. I usually use MWB for indoor shots with any kind of artificial light, and have the K20 set to automatically use flash WB when using either the pop up or an external flash. I also have the camera set up to not remember the WB setting, so whenever I turn it off, it reverts to AWB.

I usually shoot in jpeg, so I need to get it right, and the K20 does this more often than not.

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 12:40 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

I work with "fluorenscent white" 80%+ of the time, on rare occasions full auto, otherwise manually choosen from menu or manual white balance with a white/grey subject.

While my DL2's WB is ok/usable outdoors, it's far from being reliable overall. Thus I prefer to live with a somewhat "wrong" WB, but a constant one. Tried different settings and the above works best for me, even indoors or with flash.

As for RAW/JPEG. I mostly use RAW, switching to JPEG when I shoot a lot of photos or if speed is an issue.

Regards,
Th.
thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 12:49 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
jachol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NW. England
Posts: 1,201
Default

Wow Dal !, thanks for jogging my memory ... this is something I experimented with in my P&S days, I'd looked at the price of Expodisk, and like you ruled that one out, but I

did experiment with a homebrew version made from a 49mm lens hood mounting ring ( the rubber had perished and split), with 2 disks of translucent material cut from

a milk container, (1 disk didn't seem dense enough), that produced similar results to yours, and I think more consistent results generally.

Since switching to a DSLR the idea had faded from memory, I've tended to rely on auto WB in good light outdoors,and only become more fussy about it in poor light

conditions ... particularly indoors.

Tell me ... with this 67mm device are you making the WB setting with it held in front of the lens, it obviously wont fasten in any way to all lens filter sizes. At the price you've

paid it could be a good investment.

Being retired I do have time to PP my shots, also having some eye problems I do try to limit the time I spend in front of the monitor screen, and haven't done a lot with

RAW. An LCD monitor has certainly helped with the eye problems. I look forward to hearing of future results, and your opinions on the device in general. ... Jack
jachol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 1:21 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,868
Default

Jack - The reason this one was such a good buy, was the size - 67mm

This is bigger than any of my current lenses, so I bought a step up ring 52-67mm to start with, and may buy a couple more in the future.

Although, just holding it in front of the lens works just as well.


Just got to remmeber to point it towards the light source, as it reads as an incident light meter.


Dal
Dal1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 1:31 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
bper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 454
Default

This may or may not be of any help. There was a post a while back by someone who purchased one of these and was quite happy with it. I think this is the way I am going to go.

I have a DL and I find that most of the time my photos do have a little blue cast to them in AWB. It would be nice not to have to worry about white balance problems anymore. Anyway, here is the link with some interesting information- Bruce

http://www.digitalphotographykits.com/
bper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2008, 1:49 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

As for the RAW development thingie. (a lil' off-topic, but might be of interest)

I am in the same boat... I don't have the time to really develop ALL of my RAW shots, but after some research I might have found an affordable solution: QImage. The studio edition also develops RAW images into JPEG and the automatic mode is quite good and usable for most standard situations. Coupled with the direct RAW printing capabilties I've solved my "give JPEG's/prints quick to some friends" problems. The advantages of RAW are just too good for me to throw away.For the 1st and 2nd sort of the RAW's I use FastStone MaxView as the Pentx Photo browser has no tagging,no keyboard mode (cycle through images, tag, etc.)and quick delete . Only the "special" images will be postprocessed using other software like the Pentax Lab, RAW Therapee and gfx program.

Possible other choice for a RAW converter with a good "auto" mode --> DxO (heard good things about it from Canon/Nikon users, where it seems to be a common tool because of the good lens correction. Unfortunately not many Pentax lenses supported yet).

Maybe this gives you some ideas,
Th.
thkn777 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 1:32 PM.