As we all know, DPR's K-5 review has been out:-
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk5
Congratz to Pentax for getting a "Gold Award" for this camera. I think DPR's comments and remarks throughout the whole review are in general accurate and fair enough this time. In particular, the video feature of the K-5 is dated and full of limitations. Namely, as I have been saying those for long here, its Motion JPEG codec is rather inefficient and the lack of AF (neither re-focusing) during video recording are too outdated against the current competition. Furthermore, no K-5 user could take a full-resolution photo at the time of video recording, unlike what Canon, Nikon and Sony DSLR users can now do with their current models.
As we can also see from the resolution chart tests, K-5's JPEG engine is obviously still quite weak when it is compared to what RAW could deliver. So, it would be better to shoot RAW to get the highest possible resolution and image details. This holds true for the Nikon D7000. But I do find that the difference between RAW and JPEG is less subtle as for the case of K-x, which should be a more ideal JPEG machine. Maybe it's time for a PRIME III or EXPEED 3 or whatsoever. But anyway, I think the camera makers know well how to make a "proper" image engine according to the targeted market segments and selling prices of their products.
Finally, despite what measurbations and comments as laid down in the review and put up by the reviewers, we still need to view and inspect all those selected samples and judge by ourselves further, but yet I think I am not impressed by many of those, nevertheless.
Finally, I think this "early arrived" (when compared to previous Pentax DSLR models) and favourable DPR K-5 review should have helped Pentax a lot in promoting their K-5 and products and more importantly, to help those potential or existing K-5 users for more "re-assurance" for themselves, which many of the gadget consumers nowadays always want! :-D But then I am afraid that the K-5 Sensor Stains Issue and Evil would still hurt them much, that is, the potential users will hold on their purchasing plan, until and unless Pentax/Hoya would really tell us something about this quality issue and the root cause, and more importantly, the corrective and preventive remedials.
Next, let's talk about the true Pentax DSLR flagship but which is not of K-mount anyway, i.e., the 645D. Here is a new review with (small sized) samples, view the links below:-
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2010-12-blog.html#blog20101216Pentax645Dexamples
http://diglloyd.com/dap/index.html#Pentax645D
Update (12-21):-
Since DPR's K-5 review has been out, people have been wondering and discussing about why a different "standard" lens has been used for the final review, and in particularly, it is the first time for DPR to have such a move. See what Peter Zheng reports and comments:-
http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=818466
(in Chinese, Google translated English Page Here)
He has got the previous K-5 measurbation test shots and crops with the FA50/1.4 lens on K-5 (originally, when the DPR 60D review was published just earlier) and then compared to those with the DFA 50/2.8 Macro now, for the final K-5 review.. I wonder comment further for what Peter has found and writes. You'd better read and judge yourself. I blog, you decide! :-)
Previous Related:-
Ten Reasons for Thinking Twice before Decided on a K-5..