I'll just add the new DFA lenses designed for the K-1 show virtually no CA at all. Maybe just 1 or 2 pixels width out of over 7000 across the image. Completely unnoticeable at normal viewing distances.

One post in three years! Careful!!

I agree it is quite noticeable with that shot, though I have no idea why, only it doesn't seem very sharp. Basic PP though does eliminate it (I've also brightened it up a little.)


Can you remember which lens you used?

I agree 100% with the contemporary comment after the article by Semi regarding that review. It seems the reviewer wasn't familiar with the camera enough to write a comprehensive review of it.
The point about burning out highlights seems very odd as if its something you'd want to happen. You wouldn't!
The fact some lenses show chromatic aberration shows how good the sensor is, out resolving the lenses. The 18-135 isn't a bad lens, but it isn't top of the range either, it's a consumer superzoom! The image I believe that was used as an example to show CA was the view through the tree. If so I can't actually detect any CA in it, even after clicking through to the full resolution image. That said, the same photo taken on ANother brand might well show CA, it isn't purely a Pentax issue, its down to compromises in lens designs.
I have to say in reality the review was quite ill informed and seemed intent on doing Pentax a disservice. Even so, the K-3 still got four stars, for what they're worth! It's sad the OP here was swayed by such a review that didn't suggest ways of overcoming the problem (if indeed it was a problem which it wasn't.)
Expect to notice flaws in lens designs using a K-1, but its not the camera's fault when they are evident. For Pentax branded lenses, the camera's correction database will do its best to mask any lens issues if you wish to use that option (the downside of that is It makes the process of writing a file to the memory card longer which could be dealt with in PP afterwards.)
It should be mentioned the K-3's dynamic range far exceeds much of the opposition at its price level and the K-1 betters that. It seems some of the other brand users are switching the way of Pentax now. Indeed the K-1 has proved so popular its price has increased, not gone down like most others do! Normally when buying a new camera model one expects to loose out being an early adopter pricewise. Not so with the K-1.

Adding some prices might make some of the items more tempting and give a ball park figure for what you're expecting!

I think it might be a Practica B mount. Google it and compare.

Also see http://vintage-camera-lenses.com/praktica-b-mount-adapter/

While similar, it isn't a Pentax K mount.

Surely if it was a sensor problem it would affect every image. I've not heard of that being a reason but would be interested to view what you researched suggesting it is. While not a problem, a sensor is quite different to a film emulsion.

The M 28 is one of the older lenses that can be subject to CA at the edges and being fully manual has no means of passing through its details to the camera body. The only way with that lens is to remove any CA in post processing. Most of the old pre digital lenses suffer from this to some extent but at normal magnification and viewing distances it doesn't usually present a problem. Back in the film days there weren't pixels to peep at 100% and the lenses were designed for film emulsions (sensors hadn't been invented!) The fact the old lenses work as well as they do on digital is a huge bonus and having a dedicated FF camera to use them on is the icing on the cake. Using them as intended at their original focal length on a full frame sensor means any aberrations are not so highly magnified; whereas using them on APS-C is the equivalent of using a digital zoom on a compact camera, lens faults are more obvious. One used to read that the K-1 would highlight lens faults more but that was not true (unless pixel peeping at high magnifications which is the same as with APS-C in any event.)

I'm surprised you had an issue with the 16-85mm I find that lens superb in all respects on several APS-C bodies, perhaps you had a bad one or hadn't calibrated its focus and it was out more than usual or more likely, you hadn't turned on chromatic aberration correction, or a combination of these. The 16-85, however, wouldn't be a first choice lens for full frame as its image circle doesn't cover the whole full frame sensor.

Never experienced it. Well not true, but only the result of lenses, usually older ones not designed for digital. The newer lenses use achromatic optical designs and special extra-low dispersion elements to reduce it. The K-1 with the new DFA lenses is brilliant! You may get CA using some older glass.

I'll toast that!

Below is what I initially wrote, but have just checked my TC and it is the Tamron 1.4x Pz-AF MC4 version. I think its much the same converter though.

Well I could do as I have both, but 500mm is more than enough for me not to need a TC with it. Do you wish something testing?
If it's, 'does the focusing works through the TC's power contacts,' yes it does. Can't check with a K3ii specifically though as I missed that variant out but can't believe that would be an exception!
Unlike the Pentax converter, the Kenko doesn't report the adjusted focal length.