DPR's K-x Review -- Why All the Griping?

I have been lurking today, reading forum member comments about DPR's K-x review, and can't believe some of the things I am reading. Sure, there are typos and a few other warts, but this is a fantastic review for the K-x any way you cut it. Pentax execs are probably tipping the bubbly as we speak.

Bottom line, Pentax could not have hoped for a better review.

Consider DPR's ratings for Canon's 500D, Nikon's D5000, and Pentax's K-x:

Canon 500D
8.0 Build quality
8.0 Ergonomics and handling
9.0 Features
8.5 Image Quality
8.0 Performance (speed)
8.0 Value

Nikon D5000
8.0 Build quality
8.0 Ergonomics and handling
9.0 Features
8.5 Image Quality
8.5 Performance (speed)
8.0 Value

Pentax K-x
8.0 Build quality
8.0 Ergonomics and handling
9.0 Features
9.0 Image Quality
8.5 Performance (speed)
9.0 Value

Some reviewers have complained that the 8.0 score for build quality is unfair, but it does not seem out of line to me when you look at the above ratings. All three of these cameras are well built. What stands out the most is the size of the K-x -- it is significantly less bulky than the others, yet it handles really well.

Where it counts the most, the K-x shines -- 9.0 for image quality.

And is there another camera around that can lay claim to 1,900 shots on a single set of batteries?

This was a fair and favorable review. Like always, there will be mistakes here and there (spelling, grammer, typing, content) but a respectful dialogue about these will usually result in a correction from the reviewer. I lot of the comments I have seen here are of the "chip on the shoulder" variety -- Pentax gets no respect, there's a bias towards Canikon, etc. -- when in fact this review should be cause for celebration.

The K-x is a winner for Pentax.