[JinDesu]

I tried resizing (to 16 MP) a DNG from the IR site for the K-3 at ISO 51200, and compared the result to a DNG for the K-5IIs at ISO 51200, after first using the same noise reduction parameters in Lightroom. The colour noise from the K-3 is much worse even after resizing.

I printed DNGs from the IR site for the K-3 and K-5IIs at ISO 51200, at A3+. (Without resizing). The noise from the K-3 was much worse at plausible Lightroom parameters. I had to raise the noise reduction for the K-3 to amounts that I consider unreasonable to get a match.

(I don't know if I can recover the degradation caused by the excessive noise reduction for the K-3. Perhaps with practice I can get back to the level of the K-5IIs).

Can you provide evidence that what you say works in practice with these two cameras? Not just in theory?

I will try do so when I am fully sure my Lightroom is properly updated for the k-3. Right now my Lightroom 5 does some weird things with the noise, and my Lightroom 3 does some weird things with the red saturation.

[Barry Pearson]

I will try do so when I am fully sure my Lightroom is properly updated for the k-3. Right now my Lightroom 5 does some weird things with the noise, and my Lightroom 3 does some weird things with the red saturation.

Interesting! If the K-3 is posing a challenge even to Lightroom 5, there is something very strange (and worrying) going on.

The question arises: if your earlier statement was not based on use of Lightroom, what was it based on? Where did the claim that things would even be better with the K-3 come from?

[Azzy]

I will try do so when I am fully sure my Lightroom is properly updated for the k-3. Right now my Lightroom 5 does some weird things with the noise, and my Lightroom 3 does some weird things with the red saturation.

I find using natural profile and +3 Hue gives the most color rendition, especially for reds

[novsky]

Wow that's really worrying !!!!!

[Quicksand]

It's not worrying to me at all.

DNG is a "standard," yes, but all cameras have their idiosyncrasies. When Lightroom and ACR camera profiles are updated to officially support the K-3, if the image quality isn't up to par at that point, then I'll worry.

[Winder]

DNG is designed to be BACKWARDS comparable not FORWARDS. DNG is an archival format that means all future versions of the DNG standard will open all older versions. It does not mean that RAW processors using older DNG versions can open newer DNG files.

Until Adobe updates LR5 to support the K-3 people are not going to get good results.

The only way to currently test RAW files from the K-3 is to install the Pentax software that comes with the camera. The Silkypix software is pretty awkward IMHO, but it actually does a very good job with RAW files..... Probably better than Adobe.

[Barry Pearson]

DNG is designed to be BACKWARDS comparable not FORWARDS. DNG is an archival format that means all future versions of the DNG standard will open all older versions. It does not mean that RAW processors using older DNG versions can open newer DNG files.

Until Adobe updates LR5 to support the K-3 people are not going to get good results.

The only way to currently test RAW files from the K-3 is to install the Pentax software that comes with the camera. The Silkypix software is pretty awkward IMHO, but it actually does a very good job with RAW files..... Probably better than Adobe.

Here is how it works:

There have been a few versions of DNG, but the only ones relevant here are 1.0.0.0 (published 2004 - used by some earlier cameras), 1.1.0.0 (published 2005 - used by recent Pentax cameras including the K-5IIs and the Q7), and 1.2.0.0 (published 2008 - used by the K-3).

The first Adobe products to support 1.2.0.0 were: DNG Converter 4.4 onwards; ACR 4.4 onwards (used in Photoshop CS3); and Lightroom 1.4 onwards. In other words, Adobe products released sometime during 2008, plus all later products, support 1.2.0.0.

I'm currently using Lightroom 3.6 to process my K-3 DNGs, and also in fact my K-5IIs DNGs - even though Lightroom 3.6 was released before either of these cameras. I have been getting super results with my K-5IIs DNGs, (60,000 imported so far), and expect to get equally good results with my K-3 DNGs, although so far I've only imported 35 to 40 K-3 DNGs into Lightroom 3.6, and processed (and sometimes printed at A3+) just a few of these.

I never use Adobe profiles for my cameras! I create my own profiles using ColorChecker Passport. I haven't yet done this for my K-3, which only arrived this afternoon, but expect to do this tomorrow (Friday). So Lightroom is currently using the profiles embedded in the K-3 DNGs.

This doesn't mean there aren't any bugs in all of this. Perhaps the embedded profiles in the K-3 DNGs are wrong. (I have a suspicion to do with switchable AA which I will be testing). Perhaps there are bugs in Adobe products when handing 1.2.0.0, in there from 2008 but only now becoming visible because here is a camera that uses 1.2.0.0. But unless there are such bugs, there should be no need to wait for a later version of Lightroom, unless someone specifically wants to use Adobe profiles instead of embedded profiles or their own profiles.

[bats]

I'm currently using Lightroom 3.6 to process my K-3 DNGs

Ah, this is good news! I'm currently running LR 3.6 and was not looking forward to upgrading my software (including Vista-to-Windows-7 or 8) just to be able to process DNGs from the K3 when it arrives next week. One step (and one expense) at a time!

[clover]

Looks like K-3's are starting to arrive in Australia now:
https://twitter.com/manaboutnewtown/status/395492544714248192

It also arrived in France.

[Winder]

Here is how it works:

There have been a few versions of DNG, but the only ones relevant here are 1.0.0.0 (published 2004 - used by some earlier cameras), 1.1.0.0 (published 2005 - used by recent Pentax cameras including the K-5IIs and the Q7), and 1.2.0.0 (published 2008 - used by the K-3).

The first Adobe products to support 1.2.0.0 were: DNG Converter 4.4 onwards; ACR 4.4 onwards (used in Photoshop CS3); and Lightroom 1.4 onwards. In other words, Adobe products released sometime during 2008, plus all later products, support 1.2.0.0.

I'm currently using Lightroom 3.6 to process my K-3 DNGs, and also in fact my K-5IIs DNGs - even though Lightroom 3.6 was released before either of these cameras. I have been getting super results with my K-5IIs DNGs, (60,000 imported so far), and expect to get equally good results with my K-3 DNGs, although so far I've only imported 35 to 40 K-3 DNGs into Lightroom 3.6, and processed (and sometimes printed at A3+) just a few of these.

I never use Adobe profiles for my cameras! I create my own profiles using ColorChecker Passport. I haven't yet done this for my K-3, which only arrived this afternoon, but expect to do this tomorrow (Friday). So Lightroom is currently using the profiles embedded in the K-3 DNGs.

This doesn't mean there aren't any bugs in all of this. Perhaps the embedded profiles in the K-3 DNGs are wrong. (I have a suspicion to do with switchable AA which I will be testing). Perhaps there are bugs in Adobe products when handing 1.2.0.0, in there from 2008 but only now becoming visible because here is a camera that uses 1.2.0.0. But unless there are such bugs, there should be no need to wait for a later version of Lightroom, unless someone specifically wants to use Adobe profiles instead of embedded profiles or their own profiles.

I guess I wont argue with they guy who writes the Wikipedia articles on DNG......

[stormtech]

DNG is designed to be BACKWARDS comparable not FORWARDS. DNG is an archival format that means all future versions of the DNG standard will open all older versions. It does not mean that RAW processors using older DNG versions can open newer DNG files.

Until Adobe updates LR5 to support the K-3 people are not going to get good results.

The only way to currently test RAW files from the K-3 is to install the Pentax software that comes with the camera. The Silkypix software is pretty awkward IMHO, but it actually does a very good job with RAW files..... Probably better than Adobe.

Glad to hear some sense here - Winder is spot on!

[IchabodCrane]

Shot some RAW DNG today, IMAGE FORMAT UNSUPPORTED....should have known better...using Aperture 3.4

That is very odd. Apple/Aperture had no problem opening K-30 DNG files long before the camera was supported via an Apple Camera RAW update. Any chance you have mistaken selected PEF files?

[Franky2step]

That is very odd. Apple/Aperture had no problem opening K-30 DNG files long before the camera was supported via an Apple Camera RAW update. Any chance you have mistaken selected PEF files?

No chance, I have never shot PEF, only DNG and on occasion jpeg. I did try a TIFF conversion in camera and if it matters to anyone, the file size was 69MB

[RockvilleBob]

I would be interested in knowing how the K-3 auto focus and tracking are working. Except for auto focus and tracking the K-5 is consistently better than me. I ordered the K-3 for its improved auto focus system and have not heard anything except for Adam's comments at a photo show where he handled the K-3.
Has anyone with a K-3 used the new auto focus and if so can you post your impressions - thanks.

[Upstairs501]

It also arrived in France.

Belgium too, just a little more patience, not enough saved yet.

Price is 1.299 euros !! Anybody flying from the US to Europe in the near future ?