Originally posted by jayman_1975 Just got my k3 in the mail yesterday..... It was one of two that I ordered from different places and the following applies to both copies so the lemon factor is not an issue here. I have turned off in camera NR exactly as I have done in my k5II. Having compared sample shots with the same lens (d fa 50 macro and da 50 1.8)
I can honestly say the k5ii produces noticeably sharper images.... Jpg out of camera. Now before everyone tells me not to shoot JPEG because of all the reasons, I can get really nice jpgs out of the k5II and I find it's easier than having to edit 1000 holiday pics. When I'm shooting for utmost quality i shoot raw. Are you telling me that the k3 is useless for shooting JPEG and if I want decent pics I have to shoot them all in raw with this camera? I bought this because I wanted better, faster autofocus but not at the expense of being able to kick out really good jpgs, which my k5II did a great job of.
Just a note, this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed and roughly 1000-1250 ISO. It was like a blizzard outside so I couldn't do any outdoor testing. I really hope things change with better light, but if that's the case then I don't see why everyone raves about the k3. I do have to say I really like the new button layout and changes to the user interface. If I can get this shooting like my k5II I can see I'll prefer it.
Last note, I checked lens focus and both the dfa 50 2.8 macro and the da 50 1.8 are dead on
A lot of us early adopters had the same impression. Do a search on this site and DPReview and you'll see many threads to that effect. One conclusion was that the noise reduction can be too aggressive. I leave mine off to 1600 and low from then. I don't shoot JPEGS above 3200 as the noise reduction algorithms in the camera aren't nearly as good as that in current purpose built software.
The other realization for me and it seems most of us was the need for better technique. Lastly there was recently some discussion on when to use SR. Should you turn it off then the maxim of using 1/focal length for shutter speed doesn't hold with this sensor. Likely it should be 2x that value eg instead of 1/300 for a 55-300 it should be greater than 1/600.
As to noise - the performance of the 24 mp sensor is almost identical to the 16 mp one. When viewed at the same relative magnification. View them at 100% and by 3200 it looks like the K5 series is better. It isn't really noise wise it just looks that way at 100%. But with current NR software the tradeoff in resolution allows (in my experience) sharper less noisy photographs from the K3 at any ISO over my K5.
Its a learning experience with the K3. Its an amazing camera.
To sum it up - to get the maximum out of the K3, use a good lens, calibrate with MF, use a tripod, do not use SR, use a remote with a 2 sec delay or mirror lockup, shoot raw and process with a good third party convertor with advanced NR algorithms. If this is not your style then shoot natural, bump up the fine sharpness, turn off the NR below 3200 low from there up, do not use SR above 1/50 sec, double the 1/focal length value, shoot spot so you know where the focus is, and try to use a technique that lets you hold it as still as possible. Lastly you could also take 3 shots in rapid succession and take the sharpest of the three.
Oh one last thing - the metering of the K3 is overly conservative. Generally I find I can shoot +0.7 or +1 and I won't blow anything important. Generally - you have to understand the characteristics of the camera and scene to be safe. The payoff is less noise.