<div id="linkdxomark">This a comment for <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Pentax/K-3
">this page on the website</a></div>Por favor, corrijan los siguientes apartdos en las especificaciones de la Pentax K3:
Type - "Entry-level DSLR" , debería decir "Semi Pro"
Tropicalización - "No" , debería decir "Yes, 92 puntos de sellado"
Soy consciente de que se trata de una primera información, en la que faltan bastantes detalles, pero estos dos detalles son detalles importantes que si se mencionan, ha de ser de forma correcta.
Yeah, I wouldn't count on it, Lidenbrook. They like to leave this misinformation up there to level the playing field for the one brand that seems to be funding all this rubbish. If you look around the site a little, you'll see that Nikon cameras don't hold the top spots in all the lists because they earned it, but because they either misinform about rival cameras or just completely refuse to test any camera or lens that would push Nikon's down the lists. Not a single Fuji X-mount lens, 1 of every 10 Pentax lenses, 3 out of 38 Samyang lenses....K-5 IIs still doesn't have an answer here for whether or not it has an AA filter or mirror-lockup mode, among other things. The last serious Fuji camera they tested was the S5 Pro in 2006.
Which is exactly why I'm not expecting a quick review of the K-3. I mean, I've been waiting four years for a review of any of the Schneider Kreuznach medium-format lenses that would blow everything else on this site out of the water, three years for a review of the Samyang 8mm fisheye that destroys every other name-brand fisheye out there, six years for the 50-135mm and five for the 60-250 f/4 DA* lenses, but I'm done holding my breath.
Take DXOmark with a grain of salt, they obviously have ulterior motives.