Technology Tales

A display of brand loyalty

Since 2007, I've used a Pentax K10D DSLR as my main camera. It has travelled with me extensively, capturing over 15,000 images and serving reliably. Though its autofocus isn't the fastest, this doesn't matter for my typical subjects: landscapes, architecture, flora and transport (stationary buses and trains, for instance). Any slight underexposure in photos can be easily fixed since I shoot in DNG format, which preserves all raw image data. The camera has performed so well that I've found it difficult to justify buying a new SLR.

Lately, I have been looking at processed photos and asking myself if time has moved along for what is not far from being a six-year-old camera. At various times, I have been looking at higher members of the Pentax while wondering if an upgrade would be a good idea. First, there was the K7 and then the K5 before the K5 II got launched. Even though its predecessor is still to be found on sale, it was the newer model that became my choice.

My move to Pentax in 2007 was a case of brand disloyalty, since I had been a Canon user from when I acquired my first SLR, an EOS 300. Even now, I still have a PowerShot G11 that finds itself slipped into a pocket on many a time. Nevertheless, I find that Canon images feel a little washed out before post-processing, and that hasn't been the case with the K10D. In fact, I have been hearing good things about Nikon cameras delivering punchy results, so one of them would be a contender were it not for how well the Pentax performed.

So, what has my new K5 II body gained me that I didn't have before? For one thing, the autofocus is a major improvement on that in the K10D. It may not stop me persevering with manual focusing for most of the time, but there are occasions the option of solid autofocus is good to have. Other advances include a 16.3 megapixel sensor with a much larger ISO range. The advances in sensor technology since when the K10D appeared may give me better quality photos, and noise is something that my eyes may have begun to detect in K10D photos even at my usual ISO of 400.

Some features will not get used, though. While I rely on Live View with my PowerShot G11 due to its poor optical viewfinder, I rarely use it on the K5 II with its bright, sharp viewfinder, especially after noticing unreliable autofocus when using it (though manual focusing should work fine). By default, the screen stays on constantly, which irritated me as an optical viewfinder user, so I consulted the manual to turn it off. Similarly, I quickly abandoned the image level display. However, I've kept the horizon autocorrection feature enabled, as it helps fix the crooked horizons that often result from handheld shooting.

The K5 II may have a 3" screen on its back, but it has done nothing to increase the size of the camera. If anything, it is smaller than the K10D, and that usefully means that I am not on the lookout for a new camera holster. Not having a bigger body also means there is little change in how the much camera feels in the hand compared with the older one.

In many ways, the K5 II works very like the K10D once I took control over settings that didn't suit me. Both have Shake Reduction in their camera bodies, though the setting has been moved into the settings menu in the new camera, when the older one had a separate switch on its body. Since I'd be inclined to leave it on all the time and prefer not to have it knocked off accidentally, this is not an issue.  Otherwise, many of the various switches are in the same places, so it's not that difficult to find my way around them.

The K5 II includes other changes, like a mode dial lock, but I'm familiar with this feature from Canon EOS cameras, so it doesn't feel like a downgrade. The exposure compensation button has been relocated to the top of the camera, making it easier to find and use; I'm using it more than I did on the K10D. Since I also use this feature on my G11, I'm applying similar experimentation to the K5 II. Next to it is a new ISO button, which I plan to test to see how it performs.

My main criticism of the K5 II is its cluttered menu system. The K10D's long scrollable lists have been replaced with multiple tabs that eliminate on-screen scrolling. However, I think this fragments the interface too much and makes navigating settings more intimidating for less technical users. Essential settings remain accessible; I continue using RAW DNG files as usual, though JPEG and Pentax's proprietary RAW format are also available. After initially forgetting to set the date, I quickly fixed this. Similarly, I disabled the default setting that stores files in date-based folders, instead directing everything to a single PENTX directory to match my workflow. Recently, I discovered the option to add photographer and copyright information to image file metadata. This seems particularly useful given proposed U.K. legislation that would weaken automatic copyright protections, even though most photographers oppose these legal changes.

A camera's true value lies in the quality of its images, and I'm pleased with what the K5 II produces. The larger file sizes mean fewer images fit on a memory card, though increased SDHC capacities help offset this, even as I avoid excessive shooting. While using the camera, I was surprised to find apertures like F/14 and F/18, as I was used to values like F/11, F/13, F/16, F/19, and F/22. Most traditional values remain available, so there's not a complete departure from convention. Similarly with shutter speeds, I noticed 1/100 and 1/160 where I expected only 1/90, 1/125, and 1/250. These additional options provide more flexibility and potentially make achieving correct exposures easier, though what constitutes "correct" should be determined by the photographer, not the camera's algorithms. So far, I've mostly used ISO 400, except for some evening woodland testing shortly after getting the camera.

While I've been meaning to share my thoughts on the K5 II since acquiring it a few months ago, I needed time to organize my ideas. Initially, I felt overwhelmed by how much there was to say, even more than what you've read here. There are still features to explore, like white balance adjustments and their effect on image quality. After discovering its shake reduction was switched off, I'm also reconsidering my K10D, especially since this might explain the quality issues I mentioned earlier. Using my tripod more consistently would be another improvement. Clearly, I have many more photographic explorations ahead.

Three gone...

As of today, Jessops no longer continues to trade. It is but a third specialist purveyor of photographic equipment to go this way. Jacobs, another Leicester headquartered competitor, met the same fate as did the Wildings chain in the northwest of England. These were smaller operations than Jessops who may have overreached itself during the boom years and certainly had their share of financial troubles in recent times, the latest of which putting an end from the operation.

Many are pondering what is happening, and the temptation is to blame the rise of the e-commerce and the economic situation for all of this. In addition, I have seen poor service blamed. However, where are we going to go now after this? Has photography become such a specialised market that you need a diversified business to stick with it? After all, independent retailers have been taking a hammering too and some have gone out of business, like the chains that I have mentioned here.

It does raise the question as to where folk engaging in a photographic purchase are going to go for advice now; is the web sufficiently beginner-friendly? There seemingly will be fewer bricks and mortar shops out there for anyone, so coming across one-to-one advice as once would have been the case is looking harder than it once was. Photographic magazines will help, and the web has a big role to play too. It certainly informed some of my previous purchases, but I have been that little bit more serious about my photography for a while now.

It might be that photography is becoming more specialist again after a period when the advent of digital cameras caused an explosion in interest. Cameras on mobile phones are becoming ever more capable and cannibalising the compact camera market for those only interested in point and shoot machinery. Maybe that is where things are going in that mass market photography doesn't offer the future that it once might have done given the speed of technological advance. The future and present undoubtedly are about as interesting as they have become utterly uncertain.

Thinking over the last ten years or so, there has been a lot of change and that seems set to continue, even if I am left wondering if photography has shot its bolt by now. My first SLR came from a Stockport branch of Jessops and was a film camera, a Canon EOS SLR. It certainly got me going and was exchanged for a Canon EOS 30 from Ffordes, an internet transaction during which the phone system around Manchester and Cheshire went on the blink. That outage may have exposed a frailty of our networked world, but there has been no fire to melt cables in a tunnel since then. Further items from Jessops came via the same channel, such as a Manfrotto 055 tripod and my Pentax K10D. A Canon-fit 28-135 mm Sigma came from Jessops' then Manchester Deansgate store and another Canon-fit Sigma lens, a 70-300 mm telephoto affair, came from another branch of the chain, although not the Macclesfield branch since that had yet to be established and there's no photographic store left in the town now after the Jessops and Wildings closures.

Those purchases have become history, just like the photographic retail chain from which they were sourced. These days, I am more than comfortable with making dealings over the web, but that concern about those starting out that I expressed earlier now remains. Seeing how that would work is set to become interesting. Might it limit the take-up of photography on a more serious basis? That is a question that could get a very interesting answer as we continue into ever more uncertain times.

All that was needed was a trip to a local shop

In the end, I did take the plunge and acquired a Sigma 50-200 mm f4-5.6 DC OS HSM lens to fit my ever faithful Pentax K10D. After surveying a few online retailers, I plumped for Park Cameras, where the total cost, including delivery, came to something to around £125. This was around £50 less than what others were quoting for the same lens, with delivery costs yet to be added. Though the price was good from Park Cameras, I was wondering still about how they could manage to do that sort of deal when others don't. Interestingly, it appears that the original price of the lens was around £300, but that may have been at launch and prices do seem to tumble after that point in the life of many products of an electrical or electronic nature.

Unlike the last lens that I bought from them around two years ago, delivery of this item was a prompt affair, with dispatch coming the day after my order and delivery on the morning after that. All in all, that's the kind of service that I like to get. On opening the box, I was surprised to find that the lens came with a hood but without a cap. However, that was dislodged slightly from my mind when I remembered that I neglected to order a UV or skylight filter to screw into the 55 mm in front of it. In the event, it was the lack of a lens cap needed sorting more than the lack of a filter.

The result was that I popped into the local branch of Wildings where I found the requisite lens cap for £3.99 and asked about a filter while I was at it. Much to my satisfaction, there was a UV filter that matched my needs in stock though it was that cheap at £18.99 and was made by a company of which I hadn't heard before, Massa. This was another example of good service when the shop attendant juggled two customers, a gentleman looking at buying a DSLR and I. While I would not have wanted to disturb another sales interaction, I suppose that my wanting to complete a relatively quick purchase was what got me the attention while the other customer was left to look over a camera, something that I am sure he would have wanted to do anyway. After all, who wouldn't?

With the extras acquired, I attached them to the front of the lens and carried out a short test (with the cap removed, of course). When it was pointed at an easy subject, the autofocus worked quickly and quietly. A misty hillside had the lens hunting so much that turning to manual focussing was needed a few times to work around something understandable. Like the 18-125 mm Sigma lens that I already had, the manual focussing ring is generously proportioned with a hyperfocal scale on it, though some might think the action a little loose. In my experience, though, it seems no worse than the 18-125 mm, so I can live with it.

Both lenses share something else in common in the form of the zoom lens having a stiffer action than the focus ring. However, the zoom lock of the 18-125 mm is replaced by an OS (Optical Stabilisation) one on the 50-200 mm and the latter has no macro facility either, another feature of the shorter lens though it remains one that I cannot ever remember using. In summary, first impressions are good, but I plan to continue appraising it. Maybe an outing somewhere tomorrow might offer a good opportunity for using it a little more to get more of a feeling for its performance.

Sometimes, a firmware update is in order

After a recent trip to Oxford, I have started to mull over adding a longer lens (could make more distant architectural detail photos a possibility) to complement my trusty Sigma 18-125mm f/3.8-5.6 DC HSM zoom lens that now is entering approaching its third year in my hands. While I have made no decision about the acquisition of another lens, there are some tempting bargains out there, it seems. However, the real draw on my attention is the lack of autofocus with the aforementioned Sigma, and I now find it difficult to believe that I was blaming the manufacturer for not keeping up with Pentax when it really was the other way around. A bit of poking around on the web revealed that all that I needed to do was download a firmware update from the Pentax website. While being slowed down by the lack of autofocus cannot have done bad things for my photography, I still wonder at why I didn't try updating the camera for as long as I have.

In the file for updating my K10D, there was a README file containing the instructions for carrying out the update with the included binary file that was set to take the camera from version 1.00 to 1.30 (hold down the Menu button while starting the camera to see what you have). In summary, both files were copied onto an SD card that was inserted into the camera and it turned off. The next step was to power up the camera with the menu button held down to start the update. To stop erroneous updates, there is an "Are you sure?" style Yes/No menu popped up before anything else happens. Selecting Yes sets things into motion, and you have to wait until the word "COMPLETE" appears in the bottom-left corner before turning the camera and removing the card. Now that I think of it, I should have checked the battery before doing anything because the consequences of losing power in the middle of what I was doing would have been annoying, especially with my liking the photographic results produced by the camera.

Risk taking aside, the process was worth its while, with HSM now working as it should have done all this time. It seems quiet and responsive too from my limited tests to date. Even better, the autofocus doesn't hunt anywhere near as much as the 18-55 mm Pentax kit lens that came with the camera. The next decision is whether to stick with my manual focussing ways or lapse into trusting autofocus from now on, though my better reason is to stick with the slower approach unless the subjects are fast. Now that I think of it, train and bus photos for my transport website have become much easier, as have any wildlife photos that I care to capture. Speaking of the latter brings me back to that telephoto quandary that I mentioned at the beginning. Well, there's a tempting Sigma 50-200 mm that has caught my eye...

A tendency for overexposure?

A recent trip to Sweden saw my Canon PowerShot G11 being put to rather more use than was expected. If I had known what might have been coming my way, I may even have eschewed the principle of lightweight packing to bring along my Pentax DSLR. Nevertheless, the little Canon did whatever was asked of it when light was plentiful.

Once thing that I have noticed in comparison with the Pentax is the Canon's tendency to overexpose a scene. To a point, this can be explained by the former having proper spot-metering and the latter having the less specific partial metering. In fact, that might explain why a Canon EOS 10D SLR in my possession has the same tendency. Maybe it's time to make more use of the Sekonic light meter that I have, but that adds bulk that doesn't fit in with the idea of carrying a compact camera around with you.

That leaves getting more practice with exposure corrections at processing time (I do capture all my photos in raw format). Going further, I am finding that the same consideration appears to apply to image sharpening too. It's almost as if you need to develop a feeling for the results produced by a camera before satisfaction with any acquired photos will follow. Having decent lighting at capture time and not having muck on the sensor helps too, as I have discovered with the photos made used my Pentax K10D on a recent visit to Arran and Argyll. The state of the sensor needs sorting (even if it has an anti-dust system on board) but I sometimes wonder if my judgement of lighting is what it used to be or whether my aspirations have gone too high. Maybe I need to slow down a little to set aside time for working on getting better results and with the right light, a quantity that should come with autumn and winter. Meanwhile, I'll stick with making the best of the British summer.

Why the manual step?

One of the consequences of buying a new camera is that your current photo processing software may not be fully equipped for the job of handling the images that it creates. This especially manifests itself with raw image files; Adobe Photoshop Elements 5 was unable to completely handle DNG files made with my Pentax K10D until I upgraded to version 7.

As things stood, Elements 7 was unable to import CR2 files from my Canon PowerShot G11 into the Organiser, so it was off to the appropriate page on the Adobe website for a Camera Raw updater. Thus, I picked up the latest release of Camera Raw (5.6 at the time of writing) even though it was found in the Elements 8 category (don't be put by this because release notes address the version compatibility question more extensively).

Strangely, the updater doesn't complete everything because you still need to copy Camera Raw.8bi from the zip archive and backup the original. Quite why this couldn't have been more automated, even with user prompts for file names and locations, is beyond me, yet that is how it is. However, once all was in place, CR2 files were handled by Elements without missing a beat.

8?

It now seems that we have a new version of Photoshop Elements from Adobe for every year, unless you're a Mac user. Version 7 convinced me to splash out and that gained me Camera Raw recognition of my Pentax K10D along with subtly enhanced image processing power that I have been putting to good use to get more pleasing results than I ever got before. What can be achieved by using levels, curves and the shadow/highlight adjustment tool for exposure correction has amazed me recently. Quick selection functionality has allowed me to treat skies differently from everything else in landscape photos, a flexible graduated filter if you like. It seems to work on Windows 7 along with Vista and XP, so I plan to stick with it for a while yet. As you may have gathered from this, it would take some convincing to make me upgrade and, for me, version 8 doesn't reach that mark. All in all, it appears that it is a way of giving Mac users a new release with added goodness after having to stay with 6 for so long; yes, there are new features like automatic tagging in the image organiser, but they just don't grab me. Given that they already have Aperture from Apple and Windows users seem to get more releases, it's a wonder that any Mac user would toy with Elements anyway. Maybe, that's Adobe's suspicion, too.

Temptations, temptations...

The last time that I went out and bought a new camera was over two years ago, and I am minded not to make another purchase for a while. Apart from damage to the battery cover arising from a fall, my Pentax K10D has survived so far without a problem and I admit to being satisfied with the photos that it makes. Following a professional sensor clean, my Canon EOS 10D has been pressed into service over the past few months, too. Meanwhile, 6 and 10 megapixel sensors generate nowhere near the attention that might have been the case a few years back, but that's by the by. In fact, the megapixel race seems to have stalled, with features like video being added to photographic cameras over the last year and live screens coming to prominence as well. Neither would make me rush out to buy a new DSLR anyway, perhaps because having things the old way suits me just fine and megapixel counts never ever moved me in the first place either.

That's never to say that the likes of Pentax's K-7 or Canon's EOS 50D and 5D Mark II don't capture my attention with their promises of better quality. However, with things the way that they are in the world, I am more likely to retain my cash or maybe invest in new photo processing software for making the most of what I already have. Ideas for photography projects creep into my head when I get to looking over my online photo gallery and realise that not have my tastes changed, while my photographic eye has developed too. That seeing of things in a new light may mean that old subjects get revisited, and I don't need a new camera to do that.

High-end compact cameras such as Canon's G11 and Ricoh's GR Digital III do detain attention for a while but a brief look at their prices proves that you really got to need the portability and I never can justify the outlay when a DSLR will do all that I want from it, and perhaps even for less money. While I admit to pondering the purchase of a GR Digital to cover for the EOS 10D while it was away for cleaning, the Pentax came to be acquired when I realised that the versatility of a DSLR was too much to lose, even for a while. Olympus' E-P1 may have bridged the gap, but the old question of going miniature for the price of a full sized article recurs.

All in all, I am going to stick with what I have right now. We are coming to a time of year when things appear more golden and that combination of lighting and colour are what really matters, not how many megapixels are in your camera sensor unless you are making large prints or supplying stock libraries. As long as my cameras continue to deliver pleasing results, I'll stick with elevating my skills and taking my time over that task, even with all the announcements of new cameras at various exhibitions and shows.

On Photoshop Elements 7

Lately, I have been playing around with Photoshop Elements 7, doing the same sort of things that I have been doing with Elements 5. Reassuringly, I can still find my way around, even if the screen furniture has been moved about a little. My Pentax K10D is recognised, and I am able to set the white balance to get sensible results. On the images that I was testing, things started to look too warm in the Cloudy and Shade settings, but that's all part and parcel of processing photos taken in early November. The results of my exertions look decent enough, and you can see them in a post on my hillwalking blog.

While I realise that Adobe has been promoting the ability to easily airbrush unwanted objects from images and enhance blue skies, there's no point having all of that if functionality available in previous versions does not work as expected. Thankfully, this is largely the case, albeit with a few niggles. Since I have been working with the new Elements on a Windows XP SP3 virtual machine running in VirtualBox 2.04 on Ubuntu 8.10, I wonder if that contributed in any way to what I encountered. One gigabyte of memory is allocated to the VM. The files were stored in the Ubuntu file system and accessed using VirtualBox's functionality for connecting through to the host file system. File access was fine, apart from the inability to directly open a file for full editing from the Organiser, something that I have doing very happily with Elements 5. In addition, I noted a certain instability in the application and using the hand tool to get to the top left-hand corner of an image sent the thing into a loop, again something that Elements 5 never does. Otherwise, things work as they should, even if I saw points to the need for an update to correct any glitches like these, and I hope that there is one. For now, I will persevere and see if I can make use of any additional functionality along the way.

More digital than film?

Despite the rampant progress of digital photography, I have continued to stick with film and sit astride the fence. While that is something that I wish to continue, my most recent trips into the outdoors have seen me use my Pentax K10D exclusively. That, however, could be something to do with the subject matter.

My most recent trot took me into what might be described as featureless moorland, a tricky subject to capture in the best way. So, possibly because of the lesser likelihood of success, I stuck with digital since any lack of success costs less. Previous trips took me out and about locally where I live and where I seem more likely to use digital, possibly because I have been around the area a lot with my film camera anyway. Also, the vistas, as pleasant as they are, do not possess the drama of the likes of Highland Scotland, the English Lake District, or the mountainous parts of North Wales.