Kr Review, undeserved bashing???

Or accurate write up?
You decide, for me their not describing the Kr I bought...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkr/page11.asp

I love my Kr just as much as my k5...

I take little or notice of 'reviews'.

I listen to a basketful of other users when choosing a product. Reviews are largely redundant IMO.

There was no "K-r bashing" that I could see in their conclusions - in fact, it seemed a very fair appraisal.

In what way did you think they were bashing the camera, jules?

I must say I read reviews more for the factual content than for the opinions. The more in-depth reviews are useful because they often tell you things the manufacturer's official blub doesn't... provided you learn to extract the useful information and filter out the reviewer's biases.

Of course, some reviews have a higher signal-to-noise ratio than others, and some are almost all noise.

Well I suppose I'm being old fashioned here, I guess I'm seeing as being bashed for just being a Camera and not a fully fledged cinematic movie mogul monster wanabee?
The only bad points I see from my perspective are, I'd like a bit of rubber for my thumb to rest on, I'd like the four way pad to be a little more responsive/bigger? Bigger probably would not have been possible, oh and of course the HDMI Socket, not that I'd ever use it...
Negatives...
■Outdated Motion JPEG format produces very large movie files?
■No direct movie button?
■Tendency to clip highlights in high-contrast scenes???
■Relatively little RAW headroom means it is difficult to pull back blown detail even when shooting RAW???
■Slightly unreliable auto white balance in overcast conditions and in artificial light (but very good presets and WB fine tuning)?
■Shake-reduction not too efficient compared to other systems???
■No HDMI-connector/Ok you got me there!
Plenty of plusses however, and I know all DSLR's will be judged on their Movie making ability, it just seems to be more important these days than taking stills...
Eee Back when I were a lad and it was all black and white...Matter of fact there was no Colour, it hadn't been invented yet...

I've just been shooting some of the top kite surfer's (Cesar Portas) link here at Safety Bay and Woodman Point. A large group of togs were always there. Some serious kit about and plenty of discussion. One question was "do you shoot video"? No one bothered to use it and most saw it as a gimmick regardless of quality.

Although manufacturers include it for a marketing point, huge numbers of DSLR users never actually use it.

I'd swap my video on the K7 for better AF performance but that's a mute point.

Best regards

I'd swap the video on my K-5 for a better AF performance and that's NOT a moot point

Do you know one difference between koalas and rats?
Koalas are specialists, they only eat eucalyptus. Rats are generalists they eat everything, they will eat eucalyptus too.

when a drought happens..... koalas will starve to death, will eat dead koalas.

Better to be good at more than one thing... long term.

Photographers and videographers both need to fear the guy that is good at both...

I couldn't care less.

I shoot stills for fun, not to provide food and shelter.


Having said that I do like the idea of using the diverse plethora of (D)SLR lenses for video. I'm also not against video per se, but going by my natural flow I've only shot one video on my K-5and that was just to check it out. Obvisouly I'm not into video that badly

FWIW, I have shot plenty of video throughout the Middle East and Russia. Last camera was a Canon XL2. Recently sold as I don't shoot video any longer. If I feel the need to shoot video again, I'll buy a suitable video camera.

More importantly, not shooting video puts me at zero risk of starving to death. Fortunately, I am good at more than one thing which is why I get to travel and work around the world.

Best regards

And I would swap the video for better AF on my K-7.

Hmm, maybe I'm not alone after all

Let's not forget that there was a very long list of good points as well. For the stills photographer the negative points aren't really relevant.

Reviewers are allowed to have their opinions, otherwise they're not doing their job. If that's what the reviewer honestly thought, then those are his or her conclusions.

I have seen truly biased reviews elsewhere and that's another matter altogether!

This isn't Pentax bashing - it's just reality! The K-x was ahead of the rest when it was introduced, now the competition has caught up and slightly exceeds the K-r. The Canon 600D has an 18MP sensor for gawd's sake, and rivals the K-5's high ISO quality! Pentax will no doubt respond in their next model. And the K-r has been out for a while, so prices will be lower than the competitors.

The DSLR market is so fast moving and competitive no camera is going to stay on top for too long!

You have the K-r. It's still an excellent camera whether it's the 'best in class' or not... just go out and use it! What's the point of reading reviews after you've bought the camera?!

Yes indeed! I did point that out in my original post...

I did not consider that to be "Bashing" either.
That said after having owned a 24Mp "Full Frame" (Hate that term!)
I cannot see all the fuss about Megapixels really, you have to look really close and print really big to see much difference really. It doesn't set my World alight anyway...

More the downgrading of the Camera because of it's particular take on Video, a feature that will be used seldom by most and if used more it will be by a real minority. I had a 5DMKII for quite a while and Video implementation was slightly better when they upgraded it via firmware perhaps? However by the time you rig one out to be used as a pro spec Video Camera you may as well buy a "Proper" Video Camera.
Just my opinion...