There a few mistakes in the review... the big one being the words "one of" in this sentence, which shouldn't be there.
"...this makes it one of the best APS-C DSLRs currently on the market."
Actually, there are a few problems. One, they didn't test with the newest firmware, which significantly ups the number of raw photos that the buffer can handle. ...Actually, they apparently just updated that part of the review. This moved an item from the "con" to the "pro" list in the conclusion, but of course didn't affect the actual score.
They mention some of the advanced features of auto ISO but didn't mention how you can adjust your program line to give further control over chosen shutter speeds.
No mention of the difference in your AWB choices (which can be tweaked in terms of how it reacts to tungsten light.)
As far as I can tell, there's no mention of weathersealing except buried in one graph. This is a
huge feature IMHO; this is no mere "one or two seals here and there" but is as tight as you can find in any DSLR.
Similarly, good luck finding any mention of shake reduction/image stabilization. Pentax/Sony/Olympus users take it for granted but it remains a powerful feature that is still missing on the C/N bodies.
Their dynamic range test only measures jpgs? DPR, at what point will you realize that pretty much anyone considering a $1000+ DSLR will be shooting in raw and couldn't care less about the DR in "vibrant" mode?!? No mention of the DR at ISO 80 beating every other DSLR money can buy. There is some mention of its capabilities on the "photographic tests" page but nothing on the "dynamic range" page.
In movie mode, shake reduction is off out of the box, not on. This is so the internal mike doesn't pick up the sounds of the SR mechanism. I find it to be a very slight issue and not at all when using an external mike, so I turn it on, of course, and find that it works extremely well.
They listed a specific comparison to another camera in the "cons" (less flexible AF than the D7000) - this seems pretty unusual, especially since the cameras are in different classes. Did the D7000 review also include all the interface things that the K-5 does better in their "con" list? They said themselves that the K-5's AF was extremely fast and capable, with none of the negatives listed in the D7000 review. Both systems has 9 cross-type sensors. On paper, the D7000 may track objects better in 3D, but of course they didn't actually test anything like that, and the K-5 has proven capable at tracking. There's also no mention of the K-5's secondary light source sensor used to assist precise focusing in different lighting types.
It does
not clearly compete against the D7000 and 60D. The only reason the D7000 comes up in comparisons is because they've got the same sensor. Give it its due!
The focusing is a little bit off in a couple of the studio shots.
There's at least one "cut and paste" from the K-7 review where they forgot to change it from "K-7" to "K-5" - sloppy, sloppy!
No mention of the ability to completely turn off DFS for very long exposures vs the K-7 (which does them no matter what on >30s exposures.)
No mention of the larger mode dial, which helps correct the cut-n-pasted gripe about the locking button.
No mention of the updated RawFx button, which replaces the one-touch bracketing that the K-7 lacked and the K20D had.
Only a brief passing mention of the 5 user modes. I just started playing with these and they are extremely useful! I've got modes set for "normal", "fireworks", "low-light" (read: on-ride photos), "tripod" (ISO 80 and small aperture), and haven't decided yet what to put on the last one.
It's fast and easy to switch between them; certainly faster than manually adjusting the settings each time.
One last cardinal sin - they spelled "loses" as "looses", which is an enormous pet peeve of mine. For shame!
OK, I'm griping here. DPR has been certainly fairer to Pentax since the old days when Phil did the reviews, and it
did get a Gold review... and their biggest complaint was the lack of a dedicated video button, which is about as nit-picky as you can get. So, I am relieved that DPR did a highly glowing review, which still somewhat disappointed that they rely so much on jpgs, make a few factual errors, and forget about some of the really great things like weathersealing and shake reduction that distinguish it from the competition.
In two weeks, mine'll be in WDW... I'll try to uphold its honor. Without any HDR processing.
She has no sense of humor in such issues. 
