[kenyee]

Thanks for everyones feed back. There are many points of views in here that I hadn't thought of originally. I've been into photography for only a year so, I'm a newbie (a very motivated one)and looking for all the help I can get.

Load up Google's Picasa program, put your photos into it and click the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button
It mostly does an auto curves/contrast, but it does add "pop" into your images.
I'm not sure what you're going for postprocessing, but that's a big part in making wow images. You actually want mostly "flat" images out of your camera so you don't lose info in the bright/dark parts and can adjust them in post.
Pentax also tends to do more "natural" colors, though they tweaked the defaults a bit in the K-5 to make images "pop" as much as Canikon...the K-3 colors look more natural to me...

[Rondec]

I'll have to admit that I have noticed this lack of "pop" in my K-3 images thus far as well. I was reluctant to post about it because I figured there'd be some backlash. I'm going on the assumption that it's because LR doesn't have the profile yet, and if that's it, then no biggie. Definitely a noticeable and disappointing difference between K-3 images and K-5IIs (or even old K-5) images, though. The camera's performance otherwise is so wonderful that I was reluctant to "back-burner" my K-3 until the LR update is available, but that's what I've done.

The lack of ACR support is a big deal. When I import a bunch of DNG files to ACR, they immediately turn to an odd greenish hue and I have to do a bunch of correcting just to get things back to a normal baseline. But files do have a lot of leeway with processing once you get it "there."

[RonHendriks1966]

Hello mgomez, welcome to the Forum!
Without making excuses for the K-3's capabilities (like it needs any!), the likely reasons are all of the above.
Were you getting the best results possible out of any new body you've owned, after a month of use?
I certainly didn't, most have taken me much longer just to get the settings and in-camera adjustments halfway right. Even then, I still learned new things to try from other users, usually here on Pentax Forum.
Same with processing. Any sensor requires certain PP tweaks (especially in RAW) to extract the best detail, color, saturation, contrast, etc. Adding a new, entirely different generation sensor to my (or, anyone's) knowledge base takes hours of processing practice to equal or possibly surpass, results with older and more familiar sensor characteristics. Just my simple change from the K-7 to the K-5 (same body, different sensor) took me months to get near-equal results in Lightroom. Now, the K-5 images look better, but at first they didn't. Another learning curve, but perhaps I'm a slow learner!
Last, the lenses used. Side-by-side tests of (say) a K-5IIs and the K-3, both using the same lens, might give you a different viewpoint. There are more lenses with a 'wow' factor than bodies or sensors. Some may disagree, but let's face it, the kit lens just isn't going to equal a Limited or other high-end glass in performance. Since I don't know what lenses were used on the K-3 to provide the lack of 'wow', it's impossible to say for sure what the cause is.
If the K-3 doesn't seem like it has what you seek, and the K-5IIS does, the choice is obvious.
Assuming it's a fair evaluation, of course.
Ron

Well I just sended in two images to the (for me) most important sportsmagazine, I made last saturday with the K-3 on the first day I own the machine. I considder them my best work this year.

Maybe I was Lucky.

[mgomez]

It sounds like many of you are raw shooters,

if you were only shooting JPEG, would your opinion change about the quality of the images? How is the JPEG engine of the k-3 vs that of the k-5iis?

[VisualDarkness]

My guess is that right now there's a lot of people running around sprayin' and prayin' while toying with their new cameras. Once things settle down I'm sure that K-3 will be the new norm for the best new pics on the forum (due to the photographers more than the camera).

[Parry]

My guess is that right now there's a lot of people running around sprayin' and prayin' while toying with their new cameras. Once things settle down I'm sure that K-3 will be the new norm for the best new pics on the forum (due to the photographers more than the camera).

Throw in a few firmware updates, LR updates . . .

Early days.

[Rondec]

I am reminded of when the kx came out. There were two threads going, one for showing your kx shots and the other for showing the K7 shots. The K7 shots were uniformly better shots, even though by all accounts, the K7 sensor was significantly worse than the kx sensor. The reality is that when you see photos from a camera, you see the skill of the photographer, the quality of the glass, the quality of the light and a hundred other things, as well as the quality of the sensor.

Yet, we tend to focus on the sensor to the exclusion of everything else. That's all well and good for DXO Mark (which shows it close enough to the K5 as makes no difference), but hard to do based on web sized photos.

I guess I would say again that it takes time to learn how to process a camera and that my processing of K5 files is much more informed than my processing of K3 files (considering that I have only been shooting with it for 10 days).

[bigted]

I shoot for fun - because I enjoy it. I've never sold an image, but I do have many people who like what I am able to do (I as able as I'm disabled and it does get in the way a lot more than I would like). Until I bought my K-3 on Friday I used my K-r. Right now I am still figuring out where the buttons are and how to use the camera. So far I've only posted one image, although I've taken a few. Just from my own hobby shooter perspective, we just haven't had enough time to be as familiar with our new K-3s as we were with our previous bodies. Added to that if you shoot raw you may not have the ability to process it . Finally it's winter where I am. Grey skies and loads of snow is here already and it doesn't make for stunning shots (at least from me). Come back in a couple of months and I think you'll easily see the Wow factor that isn't there yet.

[mamethot]

What is "wow" and how do you quantify it anyway?

As far as I am concerned, the machine works well.

The base settings might be a little different than from another camera, that's not unexpected.

Once I get to know the tool and properly adjust settings, I'll eventually get whatever "wow" or "pop" I want...

I've seen plenty of images with "wow" (Whatever that is) here. Some shot with K-3, some K-01, some with K200D, some even with Q. The tool is one factor, the person using it, getting the best out of it, is an important one too.

[rawr]

A couple of general observations...

I'm not sure what 'wow and 'pop' mean in an image. If it means anything, it seems more about technique, lighting, lenses, and subject. I could easily go and borrow a Nikon D800 or Canon 1Dx and produce the most 'un-wow' pictures you could imagine.

I'm also getting some deja vu from some of the other comments here, which seem very similar what you would often read in this forum as people moved from cameras like point-and-shoots to the K-x, or the K10D or K-x to the K-5 or K-5II, and were disappointed that the new camera didn't produce images as good as their old camera. It's a common transition experience.

Another transition issue is with all the RAW processors and image editors out there that still don't properly 'talk' K-3. I also suspect Ricoh themselves are still in a transition phase with the K-3 firmware. I expect more tuning will be going on there too.

Finally, on the same theme, I recall Nikon releasing a 'Technical Guide' PDF paper about the D800 specifically designed to advise upgraders (especially from the D700) that they may need to adjust their tools and work practices to get the best results out of all the new megapixels of the D800. As the foreword to the Nikon guide says: 'Realizing the full potential of a camera with over 30 million pixels involves a thorough appreciation of bokeh and blur, careful selection of settings and of tools (such as lenses and tripods), and working with the best possible subjects'. Some of that advice may apply to K-3 users and upgraders too.

[DogLover]

What is "wow" and how do you quantify it anyway?

As far as I am concerned, the machine works well.

The base settings might be a little different than from another camera, that's not unexpected.

Once I get to know the tool and properly adjust settings, I'll eventually get whatever "wow" or "pop" I want...

I've seen plenty of images with "wow" (Whatever that is) here. Some shot with K-3, some K-01, some with K200D, some even with Q. The tool is one factor, the person using it, getting the best out of it, is an important one too.

This is the kind of post I expected. Flippantly suggesting it's the user and their lack of ability to use the camera properly. When I say there's something "not quite there" about my K-3 images, why would you assume that it's something that I don't have set properly? I shoot RAW. As far as image quality goes, there's not really anything different about setting up the K-3 to do that than there is about any other camera. The images also get roughly the same minimal PP that I've used with other bodies. Though I have tried a little more tweaking to get the "pop" to show up.

I've had every Pentax body since the K100D, though I've never bought any of them before ACR supported them, so as a RAW shooter I am in uncharted waters here, but not with the camera usage. I know how to use the camera, I just need LR to provide the proper camera profile. No one is suggesting that the camera does not work well. Do you not read any of the previous posts before you chime in?

[DogLover]

Finally, on the same theme, I recall Nikon releasing a 'Technical Guide' PDF paper about the D800 specifically designed to advise upgraders (especially from the D700) that they may need to adjust their tools and work practices to get the best results out of all the new megapixels of the D800. As the foreword to the Nikon guide says: 'Realizing the full potential of a camera with over 30 million pixels involves a thorough appreciation of bokeh and blur, careful selection of settings and of tools (such as lenses and tripods), and working with the best possible subjects'. Some of that advice may apply to K-3 users and upgraders too.

I understand what you're saying, but I really don't think that's what's going on here. As has been already stated, ACR support and maybe a firmware update or two will do wonders, I'm sure. You alluded to that as well.

[mamethot]

This is the kind of post I expected. Flippantly suggesting it's the user and their lack of ability to use the camera properly.

I specifically chose to use "I" instead of "you" in that post. I did not want to rub you in the wrong way, still don't want to even after being accused of flippantly suggesting stuff.

rawr really just said it in a better way but whatever. The K-3 has all the pop, wow and whatnot it needs and this is my opinion. It certainly have more than any camera I've ever owned and that was my .02 cents. If you still think I said you're incompetent because of my last post, let me know and I'll clarify again.

Do you not read any of the previous posts before you chime in?

Nuf' said.

[rbefly]

Well I just sended in two images to the (for me) most important sportsmagazine, I made last saturday with the K-3 on the first day I own the machine. I considder them my best work this year.
Maybe I was Lucky.

Hi Ron,
Based on most of the posts so far, I'd have to say you either learn much faster, are a much better photographer, or maybe, lucky.
Whatever the reason for your quick success, hang on to it!
Ron

[derekkite]

Remember that the first ones showed up in Canada the land of no light in November. The southern hemisphere folks will be posting their better shots in the next while. I've noticed the k3 sample thread getting better as folks get more used to the body.
That being said, it is different than the k5. Better or worse? We shall see in a few months when the post software is updated.