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.

Due to it's coverage of industry topics and in depth articles on highly technical subject matter it's popular among IT professionals. I.E. a lot of people who probably aren't interested enough in photography to read a photography magazine but still have enough disposable income to spend on a DSLR just to make them look cooler on their next trip overseas.

No, but people who read it anyway may be influenced. PC Pro have always taken a scatter-gun approach to reviews. They review (and group test) anything that can run on, plug into, wirelessly communicate with, or even just occupy the same desk as a PC (desk fans, anyone?).

"You, sir, are a horse's ass."

Tend to agree on some of the cropping issues. I really like the last one (10) though, with the group of running lambs. That was nicely captured and well framed. The small amount of motion blur is fine in my opinion. It's minor enough to be subtle and give the image a little more dynamism. Stopping motion completely is great if you want to capture elegant, graceful movement but running lambs are not the most graceful so I wouldn't go to great lengths to get a perfect freeze frame (no idea if that makes any sense to anybody but me - it may be a very personal thing . As for your the colour being a little dull, perhaps so but that should no be very difficult to tweak - although there is a little CA (purple fringing, look at the back of the lamb in the middle of the group and the hind legs of the one in front of it for the clearest examples) there so be careful not to emphasise it.

Just checked the issue. The review in print is identical to the online version in this case.

Like this? http://www.dpreview.co.uk/learn/?/Glossary/Exposure/Exposure_01.htm

If true that the firmware update fixes some K-5s but not others, that would suggest there's more wrong with it than just the firmware, and the firmware update is merely compensating for some physical flaw that affects different K-5s to varying degrees.

I haven't tested the focussing on mine 'properly' yet but this has convinced me to do it this weekend.

I did do some informal testing using an 'ad-hoc focussing chart' (stripy wallpaper :lol and they seemed to come out okay.

Probably because I don't have either of them, yet. Currently I am using RPP + GIMP. RPP is only the cost of a relatively small donation and GIMP is of course free. I'm sure the combination is not nearly as convenient or powerful as something like Lightroom, but in terms of value for money it can't be beaten.

I'm fully intending to invest in Lightroom in the near future but to be honest a DA 55-300 is higher on my shopping list. I've heard Aperture is just as good but I'm leaning towards Lightroom because I use both Windows and MacOS, and you get both versions in the box. That means I can use the Mac at home, and Windows laptop when on holiday.