[Class A]

Are they [DPReview]? The k-5 II review was what, 7 months after introduction? I'm still waiting for the 645D review.

DPReview is a real problem, AFAIC.

It is not only that they prioritise other brands with respect to the reviewing schedule which already gives other brands an advantage. On top of that they often misrepresent the capabilities of Pentax bodies (they don't mention in-body SR in the "Pros" list without prompting, they publish the wrong RAW buffer depth, allege that one should use extra tape to insure the weather-resistance, etc.) but also make ludicrous comparisons to Nikon models. According to DPReview the D7100 has better build quality than the K-5 II. They have the "value for money" scoring upside down as well, and the list goes on. Even die-hard Nikonians must chuckle at this.

I'm convinced that DPReview influences a vast amount of buying decisions.

Either Ricoh finds a way to get a fair treatment (they'd probably have to get their products into the DPReview store somehow) or the community finds a way to alert the public to the unreliable judgement of DPReview.

Back in the day when the K100D was against the D40, I feel that DPReview gave the K100D a fair treatment, but their recent Pentax reviews have not been impressive in terms of giving credit were credit is due.

The K-5II series was just a little more than a D610 - not much was changed, besides fixing what went wrong with the K-5 (and yes, I believe they're amazing cameras).

However, the "not much" was a major breakthrough in finally addressing the low-light AF issues that have plagued previous Pentax DSLRs. I don't think you are giving the engineers enough credit if you look at the complete redesign of the AF optics that involved the innovative use of a diffraction lens as comparable to squirting less grease into a D600 and calling the result a D610. OK, now I exaggerated a bit as well.

Luckily, I don't think we need to lose any sleep or arguments over whether there will be a Pentax FF model. I believe it is pretty much a done deal that we'll see a Pentax FF by the end of 2014. It would have been very nice if Pentax have had it ready earlier because they may have lead the "reasonably priced FF camera"-round instead of playing catchup, but it didn't happen. I'm confident though, that the camera will be competitive and may even be able to attract photographers who are currently using other brands.

[falconeye]

DPReview is a real problem, AFAIC.

Possible, but it is not my opinion.

I rather think DPR tries to give Pentax a fair treatment. Problem is that everything DPR does is very opiniated and lacks systematic procedures.

Therefore, to score well with DPR, the product needs its cool. Otherwise, DPR is easily bored and writes a boring report, missing stuff because they really haven't been interested that much.

I think it is just like most places work and not related DPR nor Pentax.

Pentax needs to find their cool again and everything will be fine. It is that simple. Last product which had its cools was the K10D.

[Kunzite]

I'd say DPReview tries to give Pentax a fair treatment, but can't really be bothered. After all, Pentax receives a lower amount of "clicks", so it must be inferior.

Class A:
I'm very much aware of the importance of having the AF fixed, and I'm giving the engineers all due credit. But it took them 2 years - time to market - to fix this issue, which is understandable given the circumstances but nowhere near impressive.
And when it arrived it couldn't make a splash despite being an excellent camera.

[Byrd-2020]

I think the press release is just Nikon choking on some sour grapes. They've seen the K-3 and know they have nothing to compete....

You've got to be kidding me! The K-3 is "too little, too late". That's why I have been dumping my Pentax digital gear. Fuji is now 'cutting edge' in APSC cameras with the X trans sensor. Nikon realized that Fuji was ahead of the curve by reintroducing *real cameras* with aperture rings, shutter speed dials etc. and they have finally decided to cut into Fuji's action.

I have been a Pentax shooter for more than 25 years. I'm keeping my 2 MX cameras and a basic stable of K mount lenses (three Zeiss ZKs, two Voigtlanders, and a couple FA limiteds). Given Ricoh's massive resources, it may be premature to write-off Pentax completely. But I am tired of "holding my breath". It's just been more of the "same old, same old" with Pentax.

If I were going to spend $1,300 plus on a new digital body it surely would not be on a K-3. The Nikon D600 runs cirles around *anything* Pentax has ever produced (sensor spots and all), and can be had for only a few dollars more than a new K-3. I'm not sure what the new ('retro') DF is going to look like. But I suspect it's going to make the K-3 look like a toy.

Nikon is now doing what Pentax should have done a long time ago. Produce a 'no BS' FF camera that is backward compatible and that combines the best of both worlds (digital and film).

Hmm.... the more I think about it, it might be time to sell off a couple more K mount lenses in order to buy a new Nikon.

---

Last edited by Byrd-2020; 11-03-2013 at 05:29 PM. Reason: correcting grammar

[Class A]

I rather think DPR tries to give Pentax a fair treatment. Problem is that everything DPR does is very opiniated and lacks systematic procedures.

I agree that DPReview lacks rigour in reviewing.

I disagree with your believe that they are trying to give Pentax a fair treatment.

After the K-5 II review had been published, the editors received a lot of pointers to omissions, errors, etc. They follow up all pointers to typos and included the "in-body stabilisation" as a "Pro" but ignored all other valid comments. They didn't even argue why they left the review unchanged.

That's not "trying (to give a fair treatment)", AFAIC. It is always possible that when you task someone with a review that they come back with something that is subpar. But when you then not respond to valid criticism that's not excusable anymore, AFAIC.

My conspiracy theory that Pentax equipment receives lacklustre reviews because DPReview does not gain from Pentax sales as much as they do from Canikon sales may be going too far, but there must be some reason why DPReview risks being regarded as an incompetent or biased site by not correcting the glaring mistakes in their K-5 II review (in particular in comparison to the D7100). Anyone who is capable of coming to their own conclusions, must be baffled by the K-5 II scores vs the Nikon D7100 scores and wonder what DPReview staff are smoking.

I cannot believe it is just apathy.

Just to be clear. I personally couldn't care less about DPReview scores and I care the least about their overall aggregate percentage score. But I'm certain that many buyers -- even those shopping in the enthusiast & semi-pro class -- give at least some weight to DPReview's overall findings (including their numerical aggregates).

Therefore, to score well with DPR, the product needs its cool.

The K-5 II is pretty cool.

It wasn't a revolutionary camera and it took Pentax too long to get there, but an AF system that works down to -3 EV without being fazed by the colour temperature of the light in this particular class of camera is pretty cool. I don't see anyone offering the true ISO 80 of the K-5 either. Throw in the astrotracer option and you've got something rather unique and cool.

I don't see where the D7100 is any cooler than the K-5 II, yet DPReview gave it a much better scoring.

[Class A]

Hmm.... the more I think about it, it might be time to sell off a couple more K mount lenses in order to buy a new Nikon.

Is your FA 31/1.8 the silver version?
I'm looking for a good silver copy.

[Byrd-2020]

Is your FA 31/1.8 the silver version?
I'm looking for a good silver copy.

Hello Class A,

It's black (as previously noted).
Good luck finding your silver version.

Byrd

[DogLover]

You've got to be kidding me! The K-3 is "too little, too late". That's why I have been dumping my Pentax digital gear. Fuji is now 'cutting edge' in APSC cameras with the X trans sensor. Nikon realized that Fuji was ahead of the curve by reintroducing *real cameras* with aperture rings, shutter speed dials etc. and they have finally decided to cut into Fuji's action.

I have been a Pentax shooter for more than 25 years. I'm keeping my 2 MX cameras and a basic stable of K mount lenses (three Zeiss ZKs, two Voigtlanders, and a couple FA limiteds). Given Ricoh's massive resources, it may be premature to write-off Pentax completely. But I am tired of "holding my breath". It's just been more of the "same old, same old" with Pentax.

If I were going to spend $1,300 plus on a new digital body it surely would not be on a K-3. The Nikon D600 runs cirles around *anything* Pentax has ever produced (sensor spots and all), and can be had for only a few dollars more than a new K-3. I'm not sure what the new ('retro') DF is going to look like. But I suspect it's going to make the K-3 look like a toy.

Nikon is now doing what Pentax should have done a long time ago. Produce a 'no BS' FF camera that is backward compatible and that combines the best of both worlds (digital and film).

Hmm.... the more I think about it, it might be time to sell off a couple more K mount lenses in order to buy a new Nikon.

Awesome! I happen to think you're delusional, seeing as how I've never seen anyone so vigorously defend a body that, by any standard, was a blight on the name of Nikon. And why are you even here if Pentax is so hopelessly below your standards? If the K-3 is such a joke, why did Thom Hogan call it the Pentax D400? Btw, the post of mine you quoted was meant to be tonque-in-cheek.

[ElJamoquio]

Awesome! I happen to think you're delusional, seeing as how I've never seen anyone so vigorously defend a body that, by any standard, was a blight on the name of Nikon.

Huh?I had to return my D600 to Nikon once. It happens. (It happened twice for my K-5).

[DogLover]

Huh?I had to return my D600 to Nikon once. It happens. (It happened twice for my K-5).

D600 was Nikon's Edsel. Why else would they so quickly introduce a minimally different D610? That's not their normal product cycle, not by a long shot. And I've had every Pentax body since the K100, never having a problem, much less a return with a single one of them. So what?

[ElJamoquio]

D600 was Nikon's Edsel. Why else would they so quickly introduce a minimally different D610? That's not their normal product cycle, not by a long shot. And I've had every Pentax body since the K100, never having a problem, much less a return with a single one of them. So what?

It had a bad rap because of the shutter thing.

Got the shutter replaced.

NBD to me. From what I know the shutter changing is the only difference between the D600 and D610. For all I know I have a D610 with a D600 # on it.

I sent in my K-5 once with a bad sensor and they sent me back a different one. I sent it in again when it lost it's lens release button. To me it was a bigger deal because 1) I didn't get the same camera back, and 2) I didn't have as good-a-backup as the K-5 (which I still had when I sent in the D600).

The Edsel didn't sell. The D600 sold like gangbusters. It's more like the Pinto - popular, better than the competition (in safety, etc), but has a bad rap in the world, apparently.

[DogLover]

The Edsel didn't sell. The D600 sold like gangbusters. It's more like the Pinto - popular, better than the competition (in safety, etc), but has a bad rap in the world, apparently.

The Pinto was safer than the competition? Wow, I'll be sure to tell my older sister who got third-degree burns when she was hit from behind and her Pinto immediately erupted in flames. She was extremely lucky to have lived. Wasn't even hit that hard, which is why Ford paid her a pretty decent settlement. Seriously, man, what the hell?

[ElJamoquio]

The Pinto was safer than the competition? Wow, I'll be sure to tell my older sister who got third-degree burns when she was hit from behind and her Pinto immediately erupted in flames. She was extremely lucky to have lived. Wasn't even hit that hard, which is why Ford paid her a pretty decent settlement. Seriously, man, what the hell?

I'm sorry to have picked that example with you, but the fatality rate of the Pinto was smaller than several of it's competitors.

[Byrd-2020]

D600 was Nikon's Edsel. Why else would they so quickly introduce a minimally different D610? That's not their normal product cycle, not by a long shot. And I've had every Pentax body since the K100, never having a problem, much less a return with a single one of them. So what?

If the D600 was Nikon's "Edsel" what do we call the original Pentax K-5? Just ask readers on this forum about having to suffer through front-focusing problems, sensor stains, and parts falling off?

Nikon acknowledged the problems with the D600 and corrected them. Pentax-Hoya (and many of the 'fan-boys' here) just went into denial about the ongoing issues with the K-5.

Ricoh certainly appears to care more about Pentax than did Hoya. However, we have seen nothing thus far other than "me too" products. I still own 11 K mount lenses (down from 19); I am hoping that Ricoh will do something significant with the Pentax brand name. But in the meantime I'm shooting with the Fuji X system. I'll also be taking a close look at the new Sony A7s and the Nikon DF.

[DogLover]

If the D600 was Nikon's "Edsel" what do we call the original Pentax K-5? Just ask readers on this forum about having to suffer through front-focusing problems, sensor stains, and parts falling off?

Nikon acknowledged the problems with the D600 and corrected them. Pentax-Hoya (and many of the 'fan-boys' here) just went into denial about the ongoing issues with the K-5.

Ricoh certainly appears to care more about Pentax than did Hoya. However, we have seen nothing thus far other than "me too" products. I still own 11 K mount lenses (down from 19); I am hoping that Ricoh will do something significant with the Pentax brand name. But in the meantime I'm shooting with the Fuji X system. I'll also be taking a close look at the new Sony A7s and the Nikon DF.

Super. Thanks for sharing.