[redimp]

Are these the same or different? I got Silkypix with both my K-x and my K-30 but I keep reading about Pentax Digital Camera Utility 5 and how good PDCU is. So I tried downloading the update but it won't let me install it because I do not have the correct disk in (my Silkypix one is the right one apparently).

[boriscleto]

PDCU 5 only comes with the K-3. AFAIK there is no update available yet.

The K-x came with PDCU 4 and can be updated to v4.4 with the updated available from Pentax. It will only update the PDCU installed from the K-x disc. PDCU 4 can not be updated to PDCU 5 unless you buy a new K-3.

The K-30 came with SilkyPix 3, a limited version of SilkyPix Pro 3. It can be updated to v3.0.0.8 with the updater available from Pentax.

[redimp]

PDCU 5 only comes with the K-3. AFAIK there is no update available yet.

The K-x came with PDCU 4 and can be updated to v4.4 with the updated available from Pentax. It will only update the PDCU installed from the K-x disc. PDCU 4 can not be updated to PDCU 5 unless you buy a new K-3.

The K-30 came with SilkyPix 3, a limited version of SilkyPix Pro 3. It can be updated to v3.0.0.8 with the updater available from Pentax.

Thanks for that. I am sure my K-x came with SilkyPix, will have to dig it out to check, Out of interest, how do the products compare?

[boriscleto]

Thanks for that. I am sure my K-x came with SilkyPix, will have to dig it out to check, Out of interest, how do the products compare?

I haven't used SilkyPix 3 so I can't compare it to PDCU 4. I consider PDCU 4 to be just about unusable on a Mac so I don't ever use it. All of my post processing is done with Aperture 3 and Pixelmator.

If you want to try something other than SilkyPix check out RawTherapee

RawTherapee Blog

[Uncle Vova]

I consider PDCU 4 to be just about unusable on a Mac...

Why do you think so?

[boriscleto]

Why do you think so?

Performance, performance, performance. The Mac version is a very poor program. It's a RAM hog, and trying to do anything produces a beach ball. Also, no Mac program should take 5 minutes to load...

[altopiet]

I tried PDCU and Silkypix, but I soon dumped them... slow, not very intuitive, program crashes sometime when you try to open folder containing a lot of files....I can go on and on, but in the end it did not help my impatient personality at all

[Uncle Vova]

Performance, performance, performance. The Mac version is a very poor program... Also, no Mac program should take 5 minutes to load...

It's difficult to be completely agree with you. I don't understand where did you find and how did you count the 5 minutes to download… Concerning the PDCU 4 it's really not true.
Some emotions? ;-)
I often use the PDCU 4.41 on my old Mac (early 2006) under Mac OS X 10.7 and can say: yes, performance wanted to be better but it is not the fatal problem to say that PDCU 4 is about unusable on a Mac.

[boriscleto]

It's difficult to be completely agree with you. I don't understand where did you find and how did you count the 5 minutes to download… Concerning the PDCU 4 it's really not true.
Some emotions? ;-)
I often use the PDCU 4.41 on my old Mac (early 2006) under Mac OS X 10.7 and can say: yes, performance wanted to be better but it is not the fatal problem to say that PDCU 4 is about unusable on a Mac.

2009 Mac mini w/ 8GB of RAM. Mac OS X 10.9

It takes almost five minutes from the time I double click the icon to the time the program is ready to open a file. Trying to open a file will produce a beach ball for several more minutes. Trying to switch to a folder than has more than one or two files in it produces another beach ball, usually for several minutes, sometimes longer.

It really doesn't matter, because the only thing the program really does is let you change the camera white balance on a RAW file. I prefer changing the white balance with Aperture anyway.

[Uncle Vova]

2009 Mac mini w/ 8GB of RAM. Mac OS X 10.9
It takes almost five minutes from the time I double click the icon to the time the program is ready to open a file.

iMac Intel Core 2 Duo 2.16 GHz, 4GB of RAM, ATI Radeon X1600 128MB, Mac OS X 10.7.5
I just measured the downloading time special for you: It takes 4 SECONDS from the time I double click the icon to the time the program is ready to open a file.
Aperture is good software - no objections.

To redimp: I tried PDCU 4.41, SilkyPix 3 for Pentax, SilkyPix Developer Studio Pro 5.
As for me - an any version of SilkyPix much more suitable and comfortable than PDCU 4.
The only thing I like in the PDCU 4 - the color rendering: sometimes (rare, but it happen) the only way to get the truthfull colors on the picture - to develop file in the PDCU 4 (K-7 and K-5 cameras).

[redimp]

I haven't used SilkyPix 3 so I can't compare it to PDCU 4. I consider PDCU 4 to be just about unusable on a Mac so I don't ever use it. All of my post processing is done with Aperture 3 and Pixelmator.

If you want to try something other than SilkyPix check out RawTherapee

RawTherapee Blog

Trying RawTherapee and first impressions are good; loads to learn but I am a big user of open source software so thanks for letting me know about it.

Thanks for all the other replies too. I won't ditch Silkypix totally

[arkav]

Thanks for all the other replies too. I won't ditch Silkypix totally

I've played with PDCU 3 ( which came with my K200D ), and PDCU 4. There are pros and cons to both. It's just a hunch, but I get the feeling that these utilities are based on the software that's actually in the cameras ( made by Silkypix? ), with the addition of a not-so-great UI. This might be why PDCU "understands" things like your cameras custom image settings, and seems to make it easy to render an image that matches the JPG you get straight out of the camera without a huge amount of tweaking.

The Silkypix you get with some Pentax cameras is an old version 3 of their commercial product ( I got one with my K30 ). It's not quite as powerful as newer versions ( which I've used as 30 day trials ), but it does work ( unfortunately, it has been "crippled" so it only recognizes RAW images from the Pentax cameras that it comes with - it WON'T recognize images shot with Pentax cameras that are supplied with PDCU ). I don't think it recognizes things like custom image settings - it's more of a general purpose RAW converter, not something customized to Pentax cameras. The interface takes some getting used to, not because it's poorly designed, but because it's different (ie. not-like-an-adobe-product). There are some aspects of it that I like very much, now that I've figured it out.

I run these things on an old windows XP machine, and I find they are easier on system resources than PE9. PDCU4 may be an exception - I haven't used it recently but IIRC it tends to try to preview every image in a directory when you point it to an image, which can slow things down when all you want to do is work on that specific image.