[GrinMode]

So I finally got a K-3, after using low-end Pentax models for 7 years. I've been using a K-30 before this. I have two questions .

I've been reading you'll need high quality lens to take advantage of the sensor. Does that mean IQ of an 18-55 kit lens (or any consumer grade lens for that matter) will be worse on a K-3 than on any current 16mp sensor, or just the same? It could take a while before I can afford the better Pentax lenses

I also have been using natural color mode all along, except for the first couple of months when I got into this hobby, which I only used green mode . I have read that the color from the K-3 is 'different', I think cooler is the correct term? But my initial impression was that it lacked some pop as the previous models I used (also in natural mode). Can it be the higher dynamic range of the sensor, making the images more 'flat' than the previous 12-bit models? I'm comparing shots (not methodically though) taken with the 35 2.4 and 50 1.8 primes.

As a side note, those two lenses above have very good contrast on my K-30.

Overall I'm happy with the K-3, and the 18-135 lens that came with it .

[Tanzer]

No, a better sensor will not make a given lens' image look worse.

The K-3 will allow you to crop in further, if you are a pixel peeper, which will allow you to find problems, if you go looking for them.

But for equivalent compositions, your lenses will not somehow and suddenly become worse, by mounting them on a better camera.

Enjoy the K-3!

[crewl1]

I also have been using natural color mode all along, except for the first couple of months when I got into this hobby, which I only used green mode . I have read that the color from the K-3 is 'different', I think cooler is the correct term? But my initial impression was that it lacked some pop as the previous models I used (also in natural mode). Can it be the higher dynamic range of the sensor, making the images more 'flat' than the previous 12-bit models? I'm comparing shots (not methodically though) taken with the 35 2.4 and 50 1.8 primes.

I haven't noticed a difference between my K-5 or K-5iis and the K-3 as far as jPEG color shift or intensity when using the natural mode.
I have noticed that the K-3 meters scenes more accurately than the K-5 or iis does.
Could it be that is the difference that you are noticing?

[GrinMode]

No, a better sensor will not make a given lens' image look worse.

The K-3 will allow you to crop in further, if you are a pixel peeper, which will allow you to find problems, if you go looking for them.

But for equivalent compositions, your lenses will not somehow and suddenly become worse, by mounting them on a better camera.

Enjoy the K-3!

Thanks Tanzer!

---------- Post added 12-09-14 at 09:40 PM ----------

I haven't noticed a difference between my K-5 or K-5iis and the K-3 as far as jPEG color shift or intensity when using the natural mode.
I have noticed that the K-3 meters scenes more accurately than the K-5 or iis does.
Could it be that is the difference that you are noticing?

The K5 / IIs have 14bit raw, as in the K-3. I've been using 12-bit RAW all along .

To me it's not much about color shift, but rather lack of contrast in the K-3.

But yes, metering is more accurate compared to previous models I owned.