I was going to pass on the K5 until I saw this:
ISO 51200 and others like it.
Now I'm reconsidering.
I haven't had the benefit of seeing the DCM review, but if past experience is anything to go by I can guess the conclusions; I'm afraid that the sempiternal Cankon bias in DCM is just something you have to read around. Go to DxOmark to find out how good or bad the cameras are. Then physically try them if you can. The Pentax Kx (now replaced by the K-r) has an almost identical score to the Nikon D90 (and much better than a 550D) for half the money. In fact, in terms of features I would say that it is pretty much the Pentax equivalent of the D90. Although the Pentax flash system is long overdue for a major upgrade.
Alas DxO haven't tested the K5 or K-r yet, but I'm willing to bet they'll be right up there with the best of them. As, I am sure, will be the D7000. And probably the A580 too.
Luckily French camera mags are very technical in their analysis, and data are much easier to compare empirically than opinion. Although, major caveat, using the camera is always the main consideration. That said, I borrowed a Canon 500D and I was impressed by the higher ISO performance. Everything else was a disappointment. The focusing was fast, but not always accurate. It just felt light and cheap (even though it isn't) compared to my weapon's grade Pentaxes. The fiddly and limited controls didn't help either. Ghastly menu system IMHO.
I looked at a Nikon D90 too, but dismissed it as too small, too light and plasticky, too low a pixel count, no inbuilt image stabilisation, not 100% backwards compatible with 'classic' lenses, and ergonomics (personal taste there). Yep it definitely focuses faster and quieter - to get near the K20D needs an HSM lens.
It's all, in the end, down to personal preference. They're all good cameras, but for my money paying 30% more for a badge that says Nikon or Canon is always going to be a no-no
