[Supernaut]

The fact that the camera scored lower than the D3100 is an effing travesty...

DPR should be called DVR, Digital Video Reivew.

Yes, but remember that K-r are rated as mid range camera while the D3100 is in the entry level class.

DVR is quite funny.

[DSims]

Look at the samples... at ISO 800 and up, the K-r blows the socks off D3100 in both JPG and RAW. At base ISO, I can't see a difference. Look at all the smearing D3100 does at ISO 1600 JPG!!

I do think DPReview rather likes Pentax, and puts in a good amount of effort to get the equipment for review and give it a fair shake. For example, they re-shot the studio shots with the K-5 right away when some people complained they were not well focused (which was true). But the K-r really did do much better than the other three (default) cameras in the comparison at high ISOs - it seems strange that Image Quality wouldn't be the most important criteria (as long as one can get the shot)!

[woof]

Yes, but remember that K-r are rated as mid range camera while the D3100 is in the entry level class.

I was going to point that out...

Quoting: "Scoring is relative only to the other cameras in the same category."

The Nikon D3100 is outclassed. You cannot compare the scores. A 71% for Mid Range Interchangeable Lens Camera / DSLR trumps a 72% score for Entry Level Interchangeable Lens Camera / DSLR.

Since K-r is in the Mid Range Interchangeable Lens Camera / DSLR Category, it comparable to the Nikon D5000.

Plenty to complain about there... 1/4000th vs 1/6000th, ISO to 6400 max, 4 fps max, smaller LCD... But at least it's theoretically Apples to Apples...

[loco]

The only thing that bugged me about the review, as was already pointed out, is that he referred to the "decent image quality." Wow. Could you be a little more descriptive? What does that even mean?

Looking at the images they posted, the K-r stacks up rather well against all of the competitors they chose to include. I'm a newbie to dSLR, but based on the great shots out of this camera I've seen posted here and elsewhere, its image quality is a lot more than "decent."

[ursamajor]

Even the best review cannot solve the ff problem. If Pentax will "solve" it as did with K5's, better (for me) to think of another choice...

[ccd333]

The only thing that bugged me about the review, as was already pointed out, is that he referred to the "decent image quality." Wow. Could you be a little more descriptive? What does that even mean?

Looking at the images they posted, the K-r stacks up rather well against all of the competitors they chose to include. I'm a newbie to dSLR, but based on the great shots out of this camera I've seen posted here and elsewhere, its image quality is a lot more than "decent."

Exactly. And it is stated the K-r has a "decent live view auto focus" in the pros section, even though in the analysis earlier it was conceded that it is the best of the bunch in this area. Comparing its live view auto focus vs. the auto focus with phase detection and the viewfinder, you might call it decent.......but comparing it to everyone else it shines and therefore a better way to describe it in the pros section would be "class leading" (a phrase they use a lot for the K-x review).

The word decent was also used to describe how the K-r does with higher sensitivities. But in this case it gets a big boost....a "very" decent job.

I don't actually think the reviewer thinks of decent as the relatively positive, just above neutral term it typically is used in descriptions.....I think he's using decent here in a quite positive way. It would be interesting if that terms was used to describe features in other cameras he has reviewed. Might be worth a look.

[ccd333]

I was going to point that out...

Quoting: "Scoring is relative only to the other cameras in the same category."

The Nikon D3100 is outclassed. You cannot compare the scores. A 71% for Mid Range Interchangeable Lens Camera / DSLR trumps a 72% score for Entry Level Interchangeable Lens Camera / DSLR.

Since K-r is in the Mid Range Interchangeable Lens Camera / DSLR Category, it comparable to the Nikon D5000.
.

I disagree. First with the fact that the K-r and D5000 are mid-range cameras. While they might have some mid level features (and I agree the K-r has that kind of swagger), they are more commonly referred to as entry level cameras. Second, even if the K-r does lean more toward mid level than the D3100, much of the criteria is evaluated uniformly. For the D3100 to have a higher score AS an "entry level camera" than a supposed mid-range K-r, that to me is saying their interpretation of those uniform comparisons is that the K-r does not rate higher.....with no caveats for classification.

It is interesting though this reviewer refers to the K-r as an "upper entry level" and also a "mid-range". Richard Butler also refers to the D5000 as an upper entry level. Just semantics?

---

Last edited by ccd333; 03-12-2011 at 08:51 AM.

[ccd333]

Just a follow up. Even Pentax refers to the K-r as entry level. The K-5 is considered the flagship for APS size sensor.....but it is still considered to be mid-range. I think it's only when you get to full frame do you call it "pro". But I would also say there are variabilities within those parameters that justify a different description. Basically, if you buy a DSLR you're going to get a.....dare I say.....DECENT camera! :-)

[bdery]

The day when DPreview will give score according to value and features (SR alone should be worth a lot!) is the day I'll start being interested in their reviews again. Until then, I'll be out shooting pictures.

[Deimos]

Wow that review is a wet blanket. Nice to see dpreview waits 6 months to review the K-r and then cities a just released (or not even) Canon as signifying the market has moved on. Seems they care as much about taking video as pictures these days as well.

DPreview should get the canikon cack out of its mouth.

[bwDraco]

I think it's only when you get to full frame do you call it "pro".

Not exactly. The Canon EOS-1D Mark IV uses a 1.3 crop sensor format known as APS-H.

--DragonLord

[ccd333]

Exactly. And it is stated the K-r has a "decent live view auto focus" in the pros section, even though in the analysis earlier it was conceded that it is the best of the bunch in this area. Comparing its live view auto focus vs. the auto focus with phase detection and the viewfinder, you might call it decent.......but comparing it to everyone else it shines and therefore a better way to describe it in the pros section would be "class leading" (a phrase they use a lot for the K-x review).

The word decent was also used to describe how the K-r does with higher sensitivities. But in this case it gets a big boost....a "very" decent job.

I don't actually think the reviewer thinks of decent as the relatively positive, just above neutral term it typically is used in descriptions.....I think he's using decent here in a quite positive way. It would be interesting if that terms was used to describe features in other cameras he has reviewed. Might be worth a look.

Okay, here's a comparison of a review (specifically the pros section at the end) done by the same reviewer (Lars Rehm....I'm picking on you, Lars) for a camera that received a total score a few percentage points higher.....The Sony a850:

Class-leading resolution (as long as your lenses are good enough)
Very solid build quality, environmental sealing
Intuitive operation and uncluttered control and menu system
Excellent out of camera JPEG results with superb tonality, dynamic range, color
Excellent raw dynamic range gives lots of headroom
Almost 100% reliable metering and exposure
In-body image stabilization that works well (around 2 stop advantage)
Superb screen and attractive menu system
Excellent 'Quick Navi' control system
Large and bright optical viewfinder
Excellent handling and ergonomics
Excellent battery life and percentage battery status display
Value for money

I see a LOT of "excellents" and "superbs". Certainly the K-r compares to this camera on some levels (yes I know it's a full frame). Same reviewer, different cameras. At least it shows the reviewer is capable of using these kinds of terms. I've been hammering on the review, but not wanting to do it gratuitously.....I'm just trying to get a sense of how and why they review things the way they do. The reason I brought up the comparison with the a850 is not because there isn't a tangible difference between the two cameras.....it's to be expected. One is pro model and one is entry level. Apples to oranges, I get it.

The final scoring indicates not that big of a difference.....yet the terminology used to describe is not taking the classifications of the cameras into account. So....is superb just superb period? Or is superb superb for just the pro models? Or in this case just for Sony? Or should we just take good and decent as the equivalent to superb and excellent since it is on a relative scale with the entry level model?

[Fogel70]

The day when DPreview will give score according to value and features (SR alone should be worth a lot!) is the day I'll start being interested in their reviews again. Until then, I'll be out shooting pictures.

If only using 1-2 kit lenses (which most users do) it does not matter much if the stabilization is in the camera or in the lens. In this case it might even be better using optical stabilization as viewfinder gets stabilized.

Its when you start using prime lenses or older lenses you will get a big advantage of using a camera with sensor shift. So its usually more important for advanced users that tend to invest more on lenses.

[bdery]

If only using 1-2 kit lenses (which most users do) it does not matter much if the stabilization is in the camera or in the lens. In this case it might even be better using optical stabilization as viewfinder gets stabilized.

Its when you start using prime lenses or older lenses you will get a big advantage of using a camera with sensor shift. So its usually more important for advanced users that tend to invest more on lenses.

The same reasoning could be applied to video, menues ease of use, or just anything else.

SR, live view, WR are features, and they should be included in the value of a camera. With all honesty, current DSLRs all can produce images of comparable quality. What differenciates the brands are: lenses lineup, and body features and performances.

Canikon are always underspecked, but score quite high, because...? Who knows, who cares?

[gusser]

Is this all you focus on (pun intended) ff issue? Man, there are so many other aspects to the camera, any camera - than a particular problem. You continue to
beat this issue to death. The fix is forthcoming ya know!!! Then you will have to find something else to complain about. You just don't help to situation.