Not sure DPR changed or not the first version they posted, some were heavily backfocused; now they are almost good, but there's the mistery of crisper shots at high iso than at low iso. IR fixed the photos, that were taken at f/5.6 intead of f/8.0 and also backfocused (I have an example of the first batch and compared it to the second).
I am not going anymore to judge a camera based on DPR and IR samples. At the same level/age of camera, a print would be indistinguishable; that pixel-peeping exercise is just time consuming and absolutely unuseful.
Originally posted by garyk I think until dpreview fixes the crops of the k-5, if it needs it? I sure hope it needs fixing. Then this will never end. It has stopped me in my tracks. I am very critical of crops and sharpness. I think all the pics here show it is a good camera. What is the problem with the other sites posting the comparison pics? It has stopped me though.
What is the possible motive putting up very bad pics? What is there response to this?
Just very bad.