[Kunzite]

69%, well, there's only one camera with a lower score - the Nikon 1 J1. I agree, they don't hate Pentax but they're not exactly fair either, by accentuating the "faults" (not always real) and mentioning the good points more like passing remarks.
They even invented ratings specifically for Pentax (the K10D was "Highly recommended... but only just").

[thibs]

69%, well, there's only one camera with a lower score - the Nikon 1 J1. I agree, they don't hate Pentax but they're not exactly fair either, by accentuating the "faults" (not always real) and mentioning the good points more like passing remarks.
They even invented ratings specifically for Pentax (the K10D was "Highly recommended... but only just").

I'll add on Kunzite about the K10D review which was reviewed against the D200.
In an other review (I think it was the D200 One) they did a retest, changing a setting because they thought it was more honest towards the camera.

The thing is:
1/ they supposedly never (did?) change a setting (how stupid is that) because they always test at default configuration
2/ they still did for the D200 which improved their result but refused to do so for the K10D.

I'm sorry but at least Askey is an amateur (in the bad sense of the word) at best. The only objective thing is DXO which they have nothing to with except they use their tech (but probably do not understand a thing about it).

Do they still measure DR looking at JPEGs ?

ROTFL... DPR...

[ogl]

K-50 is 470 USD for body...K-S1 is 750 USD... I understand nothing in marketing

[cxdoo]

K-50 is 470 USD for body...K-S1 is 750 USD... I understand nothing in marketing

Well, indeed. To take it to extreme, how about Louis Vuitton bag compared to functionaly same or better noname bag?

[rawr]

Fuji beats the K5/K5ii and K3 in iso performance right now.

When I see some DxOMark tests for the Fuji, I will believe that.

[thibs]

When I see some DxOMark tests for the Fuji, I will believe that.

And I thought Fuji was fiddling with Iso numbers....
Actually Pentax is the nearest compared the tradiitional big OEMs.
It is easy to win DPR noise test because:

1. DPR are idiots
2. Nikon says Iso1600 but is in fact 1250.

Conclusion: one is dishonest, the other has no clue so it swallows the pill (or it is dishonest too, take your pick).

[fast50]

I tried a K-S1 at my local dealer and thought the mode wheel quite good for the target user, but not for me as I like to have two dials.
The 4-way buttons inside the dial were fiddly and felt cheap and I didn't care for the grip which was small and uncomfortable. But the menus work well with the mode dial.

[D1N0]

I tried a K-S1 at my local dealer and thought the mode wheel quite good for the target user, but not for me as I like to have two dials.
The 4-way buttons inside the dial were fiddly and felt cheap and I didn't care for the grip which was small and uncomfortable. But the menus work well with the mode dial.

You tried a camera that is not available yet? (from september 19). Makes me doubt the veracity of your statement.

[fast50]

You tried a camera that is not available yet? (from september 19). Makes me doubt the veracity of your statement.

Never heard of Ricoh reps travelling around stores showing new products?

[whk1992]

I tried a K-S1 at my local dealer and thought the mode wheel quite good for the target user, but not for me as I like to have two dials.
The 4-way buttons inside the dial were fiddly and felt cheap and I didn't care for the grip which was small and uncomfortable. But the menus work well with the mode dial.

I picked K-50 over 100D partially because of the extra dial available.

[filoxophy]

Never heard of Ricoh reps travelling around stores showing new products?

Haha, no, I haven't!

Just a joke...barely.

[Biro]

It's fine if the K-S1 isn't for me but for those used to working with "mobile interfaces." What concerns me is that this new camera appears to represent muddled thinking and/or a half-hearted effort. No touchscreen? No native wifi? Exactly what mobile-interface user will be interested in this? Given Ricoh's stated mission for the K-S1, I honestly don't understand how the company thinks this is a finished product.

And, to be totally honest, it is this move that has me wondering about the future of Pentax for the first time. Up until now, I had been telling my fellow Pentaxians to be patient and wait a few years until Ricoh gets its act together and begins producing the good stuff. Again, it's fine if this camera isn't for me. It's good to try to expand one's customer base. But the K-S1 demonstrates that Ricoh doesn't have a clue about next-generation anything and hints at a frightening line of thinking in terms of product development. After seeing this, what can one expect from another try at mirrorless by the company?

[DennisH]

Doooooommmmed.

It's like clockwork.

[jatrax]

K-50 is 470 USD for body...K-S1 is 750 USD... I understand nothing in marketing

K-50 is $700 body only, K-S1 is $750 both body only, both MSRP. I don't understand marketing either, and do not disagree that the price makes little sense. But it is NOT significantly different than the MSRP of the K-50.

Price high to allow retailers to mark down? Price high to take advantage of early adopters? Price high so people think it competes with higher end cameras? (Some people do buy based on price alone). Price high to make corporate numbers look good? Who knows.

[LeeRunge]

K-50 is $700 body only, K-S1 is $750 both body only, both MSRP. I don't understand marketing either, and do not disagree that the price makes little sense. But it is NOT significantly different than the MSRP of the K-50.

Price high to allow retailers to mark down? Price high to take advantage of early adopters? Price high so people think it competes with higher end cameras? (Some people do buy based on price alone). Price high to make corporate numbers look good? Who knows.

K-50 is 449 at amazon right now, not 700 for the body. With the 18-55 and 55-200 it's 660, far better deal than the K-S1. I doubt the 20mp sensor will be a huge improvement over the 16mp. The K-3's 24mp sensor is worse for dynamic range and about equal for iso.

When I see some DxOMark tests for the Fuji, I will believe that.

You need DXO? Go look at imaging resource or dpreviews comparison tools. I own the K5 and the X100s. The fuji 16mp outperforms the K5. In raw it's close to iso 6400. In Jpeg the Fuji dramatically beats the Pentax. The K3 is about on par with the K5 series (maybe a bit worse iso).

Imaging Resource "Comparometer"