PDA

View Full Version : Majenta cast in Pentax K10d photos



Lilchilichoco
03-12-2007, 02:30 AM
Hi all,

I have been using Pentax K10d for a day now and notice a pretty strong majenta cast which was mentioned in the popphoto review too. Anyway to correct this?

benjikan
03-12-2007, 03:13 AM
Hi all,

I have been using Pentax K10d for a day now and notice a pretty strong majenta cast which was mentioned in the popphoto review too. Anyway to correct this?

Check your White Balance settings. What is it set at? I have had problems when set in the incorrect selection.

Lilchilichoco
03-12-2007, 03:22 AM
Hi ben.....it is at daylight. The shots are indoor shots.I am just learning the whole photography thing....I have no idea how shutter speed-aperture value and ISO work together. Also am getting blur in some shots....maybe my fault..despite shake reduction on.

benjikan
03-12-2007, 04:27 AM
Hi ben.....it is at daylight. The shots are indoor shots.I am just learning the whole photography thing....I have no idea how shutter speed-aperture value and ISO work together. Also am getting blur in some shots....maybe my fault..despite shake reduction on.

You have to go in to your "Fn" menu and press the left arrow that will take you to your white balance menu. Scroll down and choose "White Balance-Tungsten Light" with the light bulb icon and you will be OK.

Ben

Lilchilichoco
03-12-2007, 04:44 AM
Thanks ben......I am going to try this.Should it always remain in tungsten? Is there anyway I can determine if my cam is performing fine?

thanks and best regards

Lilchilichoco
03-12-2007, 04:59 AM
ok ben.....tried tungston.....my pics are blue now.....:(
My furniture is a deep reddish rust,the photos show it deep red....what am I doing wrong?

benjikan
03-12-2007, 07:30 AM
ok ben.....tried tungston.....my pics are blue now.....:(
My furniture is a deep reddish rust,the photos show it deep red....what am I doing wrong?

Are you shooting with interior lights only or is there daylight as well? Have you tried AWB? If it is daylight only try AWB. If that does not work go 5000K Daylight setting at the bottom of the menu. You should be OK outdoors with AWB. If this does not work, please send me a sample at benjikant@aim.com

ARP
03-12-2007, 07:48 PM
Hi all,

I have been using Pentax K10d for a day now and notice a pretty strong majenta cast which was mentioned in the popphoto review too. Anyway to correct this?

As others have posted try to play with the white balance to help you. Another option is to manually set it by using something that is pure white (a wall, etc.) If you have mixed lighting (e.g. Fluorecents and tungstens, natural and tungsten, etc) any camera will struggle to find the correct white balance. You may have to clean it up in post processing (i.e. clean it up with photo editing software).

Wesan
03-12-2007, 10:16 PM
Hi all,

I have been using Pentax K10d for a day now...

Hi Lilchilichoco!

Does this mean you decided on the Pentax and have got one now? Or have you just borrowed it and are trying it out?

Riley
03-13-2007, 04:00 AM
maybe resize and post an image or two

cheers

benjikan
03-13-2007, 05:58 AM
maybe resize and post an image or two

cheers

You know Riley..I am concerned that he may have a defective camera. In AWB outdoors, he should not have a problem. I know shooting indoors with mixed light sources is quite problematic for the K10D, when set to tungsten, that usually remedies the situation. I don't think having to go through a bunch of convoluted adjustments to get the correct tonality is a solution. I suggest a visit to the dealer who sold him the camera is the solution.

Riley
03-13-2007, 06:10 AM
You know Riley..I am concerned that he may have a defective camera. In AWB outdoors, he should not have a problem. I know shooting indoors with mixed light sources is quite problematic for the K10D, when set to tungsten, that usually remedies the situation. I don't think having to go through a bunch of convoluted adjustments to get the correct tonality is a solution. I suggest a visit to the dealer who sold him the camera is the solution.

so lets see some images and adjudicate that necessity

Lilchilichoco
03-13-2007, 11:14 AM
Hi and big thanks everyone for responding. I think I kind ov have got the WB thing. AWB most of the time,since my room is very bright during day time....and tungsten in bulb light.

Thing that is really bothering me,is HUGE SHAKE with shake reduction on.. photo of my daughter was taken in daylight indoors in green mode.

The figurine was at night,low light,and one light from top.

Some of my out of my window night shots were also blurred.
What am I doing wrong?

Please see the histogram as well....it is mostly starting out high on the left and towards the right,it flattens to a line breaking into 1 or 2 pieces.

Lilchilichoco
03-13-2007, 11:24 AM
Ben.....gee.......I'm a girl!!!!!:)......

What a joke....you are 'thee professional' here and you are junior member,and I do not know the D of Digital Camera,and I am senior member:o...it's the no. of posts:D...100 and you are senior!!!

Saw the HINT mag link.........Speechless!!!!!! Do you do the whole scene and concept...?


the histo shots were with my phone cam....hope you get the general pattern. I am generally getting a shake in most low light photos. Could it be that I do not have a steady hand at all......is my lense defective?

Lilchilichoco
03-13-2007, 11:42 AM
Wesan.......let's say I borrowed it from the shop...:). Yes I have bought it,but I worked out with the shop that they will exchange it should I find a problem with it. So right now.....this worse-than-point-&-shoot girl :) is trying hard to get her bearings......

Best Regards

Riley
03-13-2007, 12:07 PM
tis a pitty there is no EXIF, but plainly
the shutter speed is way too low
this will also affect the white balance i would think

the first image of the child is a little affected by tungsten
but not so much that it couldnt be recovered with software
but the exposure is clearly too slow, thats why there is movement

you need to use a speed at least as great as the focal length in 35mm equivalence, under 1. If you are using a 50mm lens, your equivalence is 50x1.6=80. Therefore the minimum speed is 1/80th of a second. With IS you can safely gain 2 stops, so thats 1/80>1/40>1/20th of a second. Your slowest speed with IS engaged is 1/20th of a second.

Using that speed with a 50mm lens will give you a sharper image
but you still need to sync an aperture to that. You could use shutter priority, set the speed to 1/20th or a little faster. And adjust the iso until you get a reasonable aperture for the depth of field you need.
While I have no idea what you were trying to do I would suggest trying F:4

I dont know what the histograms are about, but they show underexposure

cheers

pas49ras
03-13-2007, 12:13 PM
the histo shots were with my phone cam....hope you get the general pattern. I am generally getting a shake in most low light photos. Could it be that I do not have a steady hand at all......is my lense defective?

You need to post the shutter speed, av and ISO used for the pictures. The shake looks like the camera picked a shutter speed to slow to hand hold. Try AV mode,set the AV for the lowest number it allows and use at least 400 ISO. Check the shutter speed the camera selects..if its less than 1/40 (or 40 in viewfinder) you will have a hard time getting a picture without blur..even with IS

benjikan
03-13-2007, 02:40 PM
Ben.....gee.......I'm a girl!!!!!:)......

What a joke....you are 'thee professional' here and you are junior member,and I do not know the D of Digital Camera,and I am senior member:o...it's the no. of posts:D...100 and you are senior!!!

Saw the HINT mag link.........Speechless!!!!!! Do you do the whole scene and concept...?


the histo shots were with my phone cam....hope you get the general pattern. I am generally getting a shake in most low light photos. Could it be that I do not have a steady hand at all......is my lense defective?

Thanks...The idea was "Guardian Angels" and yes it was my idea and was also published in "Selected Access" magazine in the UK and worldwide. You might consider turning on your shake reduction function on your camera. the general rule of thumb is to never shoot (shutter speed) under the the focal length used..i.e. 50mm X 1.5 = 1/75th of a second, 28 mm X 1.5= 1/40th of a second etc.

SpecialK
03-13-2007, 09:59 PM
Hi Lil:

I see you posted all the pix here that you sent directly to me before. I still think you need to go outside during the day and take a normal picture in normal situations. It will answer your WB question (maybe), and your metering question. Playing with settings in low artificial light is asking for endless problems, which no doubt will lead to another 100 posts and make you a super member very fast :-)

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 02:23 AM
thanks Ben for the general idea.....I'll go make my calculations:)

Special K......my name's too long eh?........I like 'lil'.....:)
How tiring it is to deal with people who have no idea what they are doing;)!!! I can imagine how you feel......don't worry......I won't go on posting...and troubling you on E-mail. I have kinda got the WB thing. I don't know how to determine whether the exposure is correct acc to hist.....but well......you learn......right?

"Playing with settings in low artificial light is asking for endless problems, "


I'll keep that in mind. Does this mean that all photos indoors will be underexposed? The 'normal' photos outside are turning out fine. The colour of the sky is good. In fact Ben's first post got me to correct the colours right away.

It is the indoors and low light and even indoor avlbl good daylight photo blurring which is bothering me. What I am trying to understand is,if the camera is giving a blur in every other shot with the settings on AUTO, then the camera is invariably picking up the wrong shutter speed in low light. Now is that normal and I'll just HAVE to go manual or is my cam at fault?

Riley
03-14-2007, 02:41 AM
oooo kkkk
i guess its time to leave this thread now ;)

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 02:45 AM
Riley......thanks a million for your detailed answer. I'll post the exif data asap.

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 02:46 AM
Riley...........nooooooooooo!!! Don't leave!!!! I'm sorry I was just responding to the last post first. I am just writing to u....wait up

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 02:51 AM
tis a pitty there is no EXIF, but plainly
the shutter speed is way too low
this will also affect the white balance i would think

the first image of the child is a little affected by tungsten
but not so much that it couldnt be recovered with software
but the exposure is clearly too slow, thats why there is movement

you need to use a speed at least as great as the focal length in 35mm equivalence, under 1. If you are using a 50mm lens, your equivalence is 50x1.6=80. Therefore the minimum speed is 1/80th of a second. With IS you can safely gain 2 stops, so thats 1/80>1/40>1/20th of a second. Your slowest speed with IS engaged is 1/20th of a second.

Using that speed with a 50mm lens will give you a sharper image
but you still need to sync an aperture to that. You could use shutter priority, set the speed to 1/20th or a little faster. And adjust the iso until you get a reasonable aperture for the depth of field you need.
While I have no idea what you were trying to do I would suggest trying F:4

I dont know what the histograms are about, but they show underexposure

cheers


Riley......come back....:).......remember Titanic?;)....."Jack....come back...."....... I had cried buckets......

Ok now it seems that my cam is picking up a slow shutter speed in Aperture priority mode as well.....the pic of my daughter was in ap pr. Or maybe I picked up the wrong aperture value?

I'll just compile the exif data and edit the photo post......tell me what's up...
(god save you all from the "camera illiterate" goofs like me;))

Best regards

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 09:44 PM
ok here goes the exif...

Lense- 18-55 kit lense-

1. mode- AV AF.S AUTO,SS-1/4,A-F11,iso -400, wb 5000K, 55mm, light source- good indoor daylight

2. GREEN MODE-auto, SS-0.7, A-F4.5,ISO 400,WB TUNGSTEN, 35 mm, light source -sideways indoor dim

3. GREEN MODE-AUTO, SS-1/6, A- F4.5, ISO-400, WB ". 43MM, light source- overhead direct

4. SHUTTER P, SS 1.5, A-F4.0 ISO 200, WB ", 26 MM, LIGHT SOURCE -SIDEWAYS indoor DIM

5. GREEN MODE , SS-0.5, A-f5.6, ISO 400, WB TUNG, 55MM, LIGHT SOURCE...SIDEWAYS VERY DIM


All with SR on.

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 10:10 PM
Also.....

1. colours in night as well as outdoor shots coming out too strong....grey becomes blue, dull blue becomes electric blue, reds too bright, light green too green....how can I fix this?

2. will all cameras falter in very low light,like from a bedside lamp at night,in images being shaky?

3. I can't find the SR ON on exif data.

I promise once I establish my cam is working fine I'll grab a book and run away and never come back...:D...

(Overheard mental groan..."when exactly will she establish that...??!!??"...)


million thanks and best regards

SpecialK
03-14-2007, 10:56 PM
ok here goes the exif...

Lense- 18-55 kit lense-

1. mode- AV AF.S AUTO,SS-1/4,A-F11,iso -400, wb 5000K, 55mm, light source- good indoor daylight

2. GREEN MODE-auto, SS-0.7, A-F4.5,ISO 400,WB TUNGSTEN, 35 mm, light source -sideways indoor dim

3. GREEN MODE-AUTO, SS-1/6, A- F4.5, ISO-400, WB ". 43MM, light source- overhead direct

4. SHUTTER P, SS 1.5, A-F4.0 ISO 200, WB ", 26 MM, LIGHT SOURCE -SIDEWAYS indoor DIM

5. GREEN MODE , SS-0.5, A-f5.6, ISO 400, WB TUNG, 55MM, LIGHT SOURCE...SIDEWAYS VERY DIM


All with SR on.

Shutter is way too long. Try 1/15, maybe 1/8 sec. Unfortunately you have no larger aperture to work with, so you need to raise the ISO to 800 or 1600. Or get more lights or use flash.

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 11:11 PM
Special K......this is what I am asking.....is it ok if the cam is picking up way too long shutter speed in green mode?

SpecialK
03-14-2007, 11:40 PM
I don't know the limits of the "auto" function, but you are really trying the impossible - too low of light with a kit lens....

If you can not open the lens further (as in all but one shot) the camera has no choice but to use a long shutter speed.

When you hear of people buying a "fast lens" (f1.4 or 1.8 or even 2.8) you now know why...it gets you a couple extra stops - so you can shoot 1/15 at f2.8 instead of 1/4 at f5.6...though focus is now more critical.

Lilchilichoco
03-14-2007, 11:48 PM
Ok....so now I know I am asking too much of the kit lense. So what I am learning here is that lenses are basically controlling the way a camera performs....am I right?




"though focus is now more critical."......could you please elaborate...the focus issue is crucial or the lenses have a problem focussing,I did read in some reviews that the cam doesn't focus quickly enough.

Who's job is focussing.......the cam or the lenses?


One last one.......which lenses do u use and prefer...fixed length or the zoom ones.



Million thanks
Best regards

SpecialK
03-15-2007, 12:13 AM
Ok....so now I know I am asking too much of the kit lense.


Yes, asking too much in a low-light, hand held situation. You could use a tripod but then lose the freedom of movement. You can use a flash but that normally gives an artificial look especially with the built-in flash, and I doubt you want to be setting up studio for natural looking shots. If you bump the ISO to 1600 you might not like the grain, or you may have the dreaded "banding" some people report.



So what I am learning here is that lenses are basically controlling the way a camera performs....am I right?



Of course. The lens is 1/2 and the shutter is 1/2 of the settings used to make the correct exposure at a given ISO sensitivity.




"though focus is now more critical."......could you please elaborate...



At a bigger aperture (larger opening), less of your subject will be in focus front to back (that is "DOF" or "depth of field"). At f2.8 or smaller, that distance can be only a few inches depending on how close you are to your subect. So you might be focused on an ear instead of an eye...




the focus issue is crucial or the lenses have a problem focussing,I did read in some reviews that the cam doesn't focus quickly enough.



This is a separate issue from DOF. In low light, a lens can hunt for the focus. Low contrast (or the plain blue sky you mentioned before), or some striped subjects can make focusing difficult. Some lenses are better than others.



Who's job is focussing.......the cam or the lenses?


The glass in the lens focuses the light rays to meet as a point on the sensor. The lens is adjusted by the camera in autofocus, and by your hand in manual mode.



One last one.......which lenses do u use and prefer...fixed length or the zoom ones.


As you can see from my equipment list, I have only zooms :-)




Million thanks
Best regards

OK.

RichNY
03-15-2007, 12:36 AM
Without giving you the same feedback from the your other post, here are some pointers.

First, forget about image stabilization for a moment. The general rule when handholding a camera is that your shutter speed needs to be as fast as 1/focal length. So if you are shooting at 18mm then you want a shutter speed faster than 1/18 sec. If you are shooting at 50mm then you want a shutter speed at least as fast as 1/50 sec.

You mentioned you didn't know about ISO, Aperture, Shutter. Here's a quick explanation- but definately get the book I mentioned in the other thread as it has good pictures to demonstrate things.

To properly expose a picture a certain amount of light is required to hit the camera's sensor (used to be film). If too little light hits the sensor you have an underexposed shot (dark), if too much light hits the sensor you have an overexposed shot (picture details turn pure white).

Let's forget ISO for the moment and assume you have two ways to control how much light hits the sensor- Use a larger openning in the lens to allow in more light (smaller f/stops) or leave the lens open longer to allow more light in. Its the same as filling a bowl with water- either open up the faucet alot for a short period of time or open it a little for a longer period of time.)

When hand holding a camera or shooting a moving image you don't have the option of keeping the lens open longer (slower shutter speed) because your object will blur. You're only option would be to open up the aperture (use the smallest f/stop your lens has).

Aperture and Shutter speed work together inversely. Increasing your Aperture by 1 stop (f/5.6-f/4 for example) has the same effect as changing the shutter speed 1 stop (1/250th of a second to 1/125th of a second for example)

What you will find is that even when you have it at its smallest setting you still are going to have many instances where the shutter speed is still too slow and your image will be blurry. This is where ISO comes in.

ISO is a measurement of how sensitive to light the sensor is. ISO also has a doubling/halving effect just like Aperture and Shutter speed. Increasing the ISO from 100 to 200 gives the same amount of light increase as having an aperture setting 1 stop faster or can allow you to shoot at 1/2 the shutter speed that was required at ISO 100.

Increasing ISO is great- it allows you to expose your pictures with faster shutter speeds. It allows you to use less expensive lenses that are slower. But there is no free lunch. As ISO increases so does the noise in your images. You wont notice much of a difference until you get up to ISO 400 and that's when different cameras show there grit. You can read the reviews on this site of the Pentax, Nikons, and Canon 30 and look at the same image taken by all 3 cameras at varying ISOs. (When you do this be sure to click on the pictures and blow them up- you can't tell anything when they are shown as tiny images on the screen)

The images you posted don't show you asking too much of the kit lens- they show that you are at that point of your learning curve where we all where when we thought aiming, framing, and focusing would give us a good picture. Being concious of what focal length you are shooting at and making sure that your shutter speed is fast enough to not give you a severely out of focus image takes time and practice before it becomes natural.

Your question about focusing being the camera or the lens. In the images you posted the problem is being caused by the person behind the camera (welcome to the club). You'd get the same blurry pictures with those shutter speeds if you had the best Camera made.

Once you get past that issue the answer to your question is the camera. My 30D has a pretty fast focus but when I purchased my 1D Mark IIN this weekend- wow, what a difference in focus speed using the same lenses. It wouldn't make a difference if I were shooting a mountain but if I were shooting a moving subject such as a sports shot it is very significant.

Fixed v. Zoom. All lenses are zoom- you either do it by turning a ring on the lens or by walking forward. From a convenience standpoint zooms are the way to go. Let's face it, nobody wants to be wasting time running back and forth when they can just turn a dial.

Years back there was a much greater difference in image quality between fixed (called primes) and zooms. Today a fast zoom is f/2.8 max. aperture which is pretty decent. Primes are available at even greater max. apertures most often f/2, f/1.8, f/1.4, and f/1.2. As the f/stops go down the prices dramatically go up.

The big reasons most people buy fast primes today are two fold:
- At bigger apertures you can more easily create great looking blurr's behind your subject for very artsy images.

- If you are shooting indoors without flash it is going to be the only way to get enough light to shoot your image even with your ISO as high as it goes. (Churches and public school gyms for example) If you are thinking about shooting indoor highschool basketball for example don't even bother if you don't have a fast prime. At the college and professional level the lights in the stadiums are much brighter and you are more likely to get pleasing shots.

Speaking personally- All of my lenses are the fastest zooms made in their focal range with the exception of one prime lens in my camera bag- an 85mm f/1.8 that I like to use for portraits when background blurr is important. The f/1.2 version of this lens (which focuses slower and isn't as good for sports but is incredible for portraits) would have cost me an additional $1400+ to give you an example of the price difference as you go to really fast glass.

Just because glass is a prime or fast doesn't make it better optically. An example of this in the Canon world is the 50mm f/1.8 lens which doesn't come close to the optical quality of my 17-55 f/2.8 lens when shot at 50mm. The 50mm f/1.2 on the other hand... well you should expect it to be superior at $1600 street price.

Hope this clears up some of the questions you've been having. When you post more shots include the Exif data as it makes it easier for everyone to see how you took the image and suggest how you can make improvements.




Ok....so now I know I am asking too much of the kit lense. So what I am learning here is that lenses are basically controlling the way a camera performs....am I right?




"though focus is now more critical."......could you please elaborate...the focus issue is crucial or the lenses have a problem focussing,I did read in some reviews that the cam doesn't focus quickly enough.

Who's job is focussing.......the cam or the lenses?


One last one.......which lenses do u use and prefer...fixed length or the zoom ones.



Million thanks
Best regards

Lilchilichoco
03-16-2007, 12:06 PM
RichNY............I am truly grateful from the bottom of my heart for your effort,because it has really cleared some nicely choked grey areas. :)

I took your advice and enlarged the test photos in both Pentax K10d and Canon 30 d,and went from pentax to canon scrutinizing detail in zoom. What I noticed in the macro shots of things with poster behind was :

1. Canon shots were much much sharper than the Pentax ones. The letters on Celeste pack and on white wine bottle were exceptionally clearer than the Pentax which were actually pretty blurred.

2. In addition, I also found the poster behind brighter,with better contrast and better color in Canon shots whereas in the pentax shot,the poster looks washed out.

I went back to check if the kit lense was used in both tests,it seems that Canon shots were taken with a 50mm macro lense,while Pentax did not mention which lense was used, so I am presuming it was with the kit lense.

Conversely,in the macro shot of mickey mouse,in zoom there is greater sharpness in the Pentax than Canon. It appears the both were taken with their respective kit lense.

There was also greater detail in Pentax than Canon,in both the things shot as well as in mickey,when I zoomed in on them .

Would I be right in assuming that the sharpness in Canon is due to the macro lense?

In fact,on zooming in on the night shots,I found the buildings in the Pentax shot to be sharper,although I do not know what the gradient in the sky colour means.

I absolutely agree,the reason for a great photo or a really bad one is the person behind the camera:)...I do not know if you know where I am coming from,so I'll give you a short history:)....I have been taking pics with a phone cam and since photography is my passion since I was 16 , I decided to skip the point and shoot stage and land straight on Dslr. So....this is as "huh?!!!?:confused:" as it gets.....:)......reason why your painstaking simplification means SO MUCH to me!!!!

Now the trouble I am facing with my camera at the moment,is that most of my low light shots are having a blur on full auto mode,in which I let my camera do everything. Day images are far sharper.

What would you call the light from highway row of lights...is it too low for correct exposure? Also,in the road shot at night under the highway lights ,with white balance on Tungsten,the road appears reddish. Shot taken at full auto mode except WB. Am I doing something wrong or something needs adjustment?

Also,building shots at night show the building to be brighter/lighted than it actually is. Reds come out too red. WB at Tungsten.Shots were taken on full auto mode.



One more thing that bothers me,is that 95% of times,the histogram is a sharp high from the left,like an inverse letter "V" going in jaggies to the right ending in broken dots at the right. This happens mostly with my indoor and low light shots. Even if it's a lamp focussed on. It is always concentrated on the left,with the right side mostly empty.Is that ok ?

Is it at all possible to create a photo exactly as your eye sees it,or will colour and sharpness always be a step behind the real thing?

I'll be sincerely grateful if you could help. I need to establish my camera is not at fault but it's me,and go ahead and buy my lenses.

Million thanks again for your invaluable input
best regards

Lilchilichoco
03-16-2007, 12:13 PM
Special K, thank you so much for your detailed response. I see that even if I tire you out with my endless questions, you always answer..:). I truly appreciate that.

Thanks once again
Best regards

RichNY
03-16-2007, 03:19 PM
Now the trouble I am facing with my camera at the moment,is that most of my low light shots are having a blur on full auto mode,in which I let my camera do everything. Day images are far sharper.

-Well if your camera makes the wrong choices your pictures are not going to come out any better than if you do it for yourself;) Can you take a look at one of the blurry pictures and post what the shutter speed was and the focal length. Were you shooting a static subject or one in motion. If you can post the picture it would be helpful but it isn't necessary.

What would you call the light from highway row of lights...is it too low for correct exposure?
-I am interpretting this to mean a night time shot with highway lights turned on. Is this correct?
Definately not too low a light for correct exposure. Quite possibly/probably too low to make the image without a tripod or support though if my understanding above was correct.

Also,in the road shot at night under the highway lights ,with white balance on Tungsten,the road appears reddish. Shot taken at full auto mode except WB. Am I doing something wrong or something needs adjustment?
Also,building shots at night show the building to be brighter/lighted than it actually is. Reds come out too red. WB at Tungsten.Shots were taken on full auto mode.

-The Pentax doesn't have a dial setting for highway lights;) Your best bet is to shoot in raw mode, leave the white balance on auto, and make an adjustment in software to get the light to the color you saw it as. The alternative would be to get an 18% grey sheet and shoot it, then set your camera to use it as a custom white balance. I think the first option is quicker and easier though.


One more thing that bothers me,is that 95% of times,the histogram is a sharp high from the left,like an inverse letter "V" going in jaggies to the right ending in broken dots at the right. This happens mostly with my indoor and low light shots. Even if it's a lamp focussed on. It is always concentrated on the left,with the right side mostly empty.Is that ok ?
- The histogram shows darks on the left, light colored objects on the right. Is it ok is a matter of whether it acurately reflects your subject. Shoot a dark subject and its going to be heavily weighted left, light subject to the right a balance of light and dark will be reflected by a graph more evenly spread across the screen.

-The biggest thing most people use the histogram for is to verify that they haven't overexposed the highlights and blown out the details. (Tech talk for made part of the picture pure white). If your graph isn't going off the right side of the screen you are probably fine. If it is, and you are shooting in raw (as you should be so you can make these type of corrections) then using your software lower the exposure until the histogram comes back onto the screen.

-What you are doing is adjusting the exposure in software; the ideal way would have been to meter and adjust the exposure properly in the camera (but we don't always nail it). For example, if you are shooting a picture of a person with lots of snow in it your camera will take a dark picture by default. You would need to increase the exposure above what the camera meter tells you to do. (See Understanding Exposure for a good explanation as to why)

-As to your specific question about the indoor lamp light shots. Do yourself a quick experiment. Take off the lamp shade and take a picture filling the screen with the lamp and examine the histogram. You'll see it's now at the right of the screen because you took a picture of something very bright.

-The bottom line is how do you like your pics. If they are too dark then you will need more light. You can get it by upping your ISO, lowering your f/stop, increasing your shutter time, or introducing more light (usually flash)

Is it at all possible to create a photo exactly as your eye sees it,or will colour and sharpness always be a step behind the real thing?
- There are many factors going into this from what lens you are using to how well your monitor and printer are calibrated. A picture is still going to be only a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional object. But considering all the great art and advertising out there I'd say it's pretty close.

I'll be sincerely grateful if you could help. I need to establish my camera is not at fault but it's me,and go ahead and buy my lenses.

- At this point in the learning curve it's most likely entirely you :) I would recommend you hold off buying other lenses now as they will only serve to distract you from learning to shoot. Professional photo schools typically have their students shooting only with a 50mm fixed lens at first and being their own walking zoom and wide angle. I didn't do this myself but it would have helped me learn quicker rather than playing with the toys.



Hope this helps