Paul Stenquist wrote: > He's shooting jpegs on bright setting and underexposing by two to > three stops. How can you conclude it's not normal?
Wow, I thought people on this list could curb the sarcasm and help a person. Is that beyond everyone these days? I said this problem showed up on RAW photos as well. The problem is evident on picture number 3, which is clearly not underexposed. This problem showed up on non-white subjects. What am I not saying correctly? I just wanted to know if it is a normal for this camera to do this under such conditions, that is all I wanted to know. I wasn't calling it a bad camera or anything else. Geez. Dave > Paul > On Jan 30, 2007, at 8:53 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: > >> On 31/01/07, David Weiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> So, is this just the infamous banding problem magnified a bit? >> No it's not banding but neither is it normal nor should it have to be >> tolerated. I would suggest that you pose the question to Pentax and >> send links to select images, ask them how to remedy the problem and if >> they can't solve it then have your camera swapped for a new one. >> >> -- >> Rob Studdert >> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA >> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 >> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ >> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
