Originally posted by falconeye Just a clarification ... I posted the link because I thought my fellow Pentaxians may find it entertaining. I am a bit confused about all the negativity. The opinions expressed (by Chris) weren’t meant to be taken too seriously.
This thread has gotten me thinking a bit. I suspect that part of DPR's past comments on Pentax gear--especially their savaging of the K-1 II--is due to their perception of how slowly Pentax is moving relative to the competition. DPR's contributors, like many people in the industry, like to see and write about new and exciting stuff on a regular basis; otherwise, there's no reason for people to visit their web site. As far as they're concerned, Pentax is a historically innovative camera company that is currently coasting on past glories, if not slowing to a complete stop. A rejuvenated and prosperous Pentax would not only be worth covering, but would also force the competition to be more innovative in turn, making for a more dynamic industry that ultimately drives more clicks on DPR. They probably see their criticisms--sometimes jocular, sometimes snarky, sometimes harsher--as necessary goads to get Pentax to resume their winning ways ("Your animal AF does dogs and cats? Please! Our K-new works with budgies, iguanas, and goldfish!").
On reflection, I'm not sure we're dealing with active hostility so much as frustration and disappointment (The K-1 II might not be a giant step backward--I mostly agree with the PF review that classifies it as a real upgrade--but it doesn't strike me as a massive improvement over the K-1). Can any of us not say we feel the same way regarding Ricoh's stewardship of the Pentax brand?