[hcc]

Imagign-resources just published a full review of the Pentax X-5:
Pentax X-5 Camera - Express Review

The review is overall positive and it is good to see Pentax in the news.....

[Adam G]

The final verdict non-withstanding, this review is idiotic.

Let me grant them a few points before I really get going: Their concern about processing speed is perfectly valid and I have no objections here. Same for the battery compartment (they had issues with the AAs falling out when changing the SD card).

On the other hand, they open with

It may look a lot like a shrunken version of the Pentax K-30, and it may bear a model name similar to Pentax's popular K-5, but it's definitely no DSLR.

and then immediately change their tune to

They promptly answered by borrowing the extremely popular styling of its Pentax K-5 DSLR -- and its name, bar one letter -- to create the Pentax X-5.

Under the first set of pros and cons (yeah, there are two lists), the first con listed is:

DSLR-style camera body might attract enthusiasts who will be disappointed in the X-5's consumer focus

which is backed up thus:

we have to wonder whether basing the X-5 so closely on a fully-featured SLR may lead to some confusion in the minds of consumers. ("My camera looks just like my friend's, so why aren't my pictures as good?")

Enthusiasts, huh? There is a difference between mistaking a particular camera for a different model at first glance, and on the other hand, confusing the capabilities and feature sets of two very different beasts that simply happen to look somewhat alike. It seems IR underestimates the intelligence of their "enthusiast."

During the next few paragraphs, they repeatedly compare the X-5 to the K-5, even while they concede that

we're perhaps being a little unfair by drawing the comparison to an SLR. We do so only because with the extremely direct port of the styling from the company's flagship APS-C DSLR, many of its customers are likely to do the same.

So the single largest con they can think of, the issue that is hammered out from start to end, is an issue not with the camera itself but rather with consumer expectations—and they know it but persist anyway!


Also an eyebrow-raiser: This is their idea of a low-light image:




And I've just now found another flip-flop in their opinion: toward the end, the X-5 again

reminds us of a shrunken Pentax K-30

Despite their grumbling throughout, it appears that the value-for-money factor demanded that they award the X-5 a Dave's Pick. To be fair, it is very well priced and yet packs SR, an EVF, an articulated LCD and a superzoom lens largely devoid of geometric distortion. They couldn't ignore this. I believe this forced their hand, but I don't think they were particularly happy about it.