Hey, hey, lets be careful with the wording!
I did not "take the camera into the shower", implying _with me_.
My camera and I are often quite close, but that is just getting a bit too weird!

I did hold the camera under the shower head and take a few shots, etc...
A torrential rain storm was much worse and actually allowed a very tiny drop of water to enter the connector socket door. Anyway, I am pleased with the water tightness of the kit!

I also dropped my K10D with DA* 50-135 from about four feet with no adverse side effects on either camera nor lens. No not intentionally -- an old tripod did not hold the camera in portrait mode very well... tripod is no more
(I don't think the DA* 16-50 would hold up to that, but that 50-135 is a wonderful beast.)

Just be careful with running more than one at a time. Depending on how they hook the system, they may cause conflicts. This is especially true of firewalls that intercept or re-write low level NDIS APIs.
In order to be a good virus/malware scanner they have to be pretty low level when accessing system resources. So this would also likely be true for anything that hooks disk reads and writes, registry access, system clock, break point handlers, etc...).

Having multiple programs performing similar low level changes to your system may not be a good idea. If you don't know for sure how a particular program affects your system, it is probably best not to run it at the same time as similar software.



FYI,
Unfortunately I cannot find the site I used to reference that did some pretty intensive tests. The one I found via Google is in a different format. Also two years old, so near useless by now.
Anyway, it may still be informative for entertainment purposes :
http://www.firewallleaktester.com/tests_overview.php

I used to work for a security company that did a study on the state-of-the-art of virus/firewall software. (sort of a gray area company... writing both protection and attack software - for law enforcement use)

When tested against ancient (five year old) kit software (i.e. software used by script kiddies to build viruses), most of the current stuff out there detected less than half of these. Quite hilarious, although scary at the same time since many advancements in virus technology have come out in the years since!! Yet most current protection software could not handle basic five year old technology! Yikes!!
Most current software was almost totally ineffective in detecting installation or execution of more current up-to-date malware.

In the end, McAffe and Norton were both about average (detecting about 50% of the old stuff) but with severe hits on system performance and stability.
AVG was about on par but much more stable and less of a drain on system resources.
Windows firewall is an absolute waste. It handles only the most basic and trivial of attacks!!

ZoneAlarm pro did adequately and detected more root-kit invasions than any other software.

I use ZoneAlarm myself, but over the past year or so they started getting much more system resource intensive.

I would probably go with AVG or ZoneAlarm at the moment. Unless things changed ENORMOUSLY in the past year, nothing else puts a candle to them.

*** But the best protection available is simple common sense and caution:

Do not access questionable websites and do not open attachments on emails. Don't use Microsoft mail programs as they will happily execute code quite easily. (yes, software can be written such that it can be installed and not detected by ANY of the current virus/firewall protection softwares if you're not careful)


Also, for whatever software you have, do not run multiples of the same types... do not run more than one firewall. Do not run more than one malware/virus detection program. In general these can conflict with other software and cause attacks to not be detected. (Some may not, but follow suggestions in the manual if given)
This may or may not be part of the problem with McAffee.... although I must say I've always hated McAffee -- it is horrendously unstable and resource heavy. From my own experience, it is probably the worst of the lot.


edit:
Actually I remember one other piece of software being potentially better than the rest... Once I get back home, Ill have to dig up the website that does intensive comparisons against these types of programs. I did not get a chance to use the one they rated the best, but their findings were pretty consistent with our particular testing so I would have confidence in what they list.

(I think Zone Alarm was number two or three and AVG only slightly lower at the time, but all close enough to be considered in the same league. Other popular software, Norton, mcAffee, etc... rated much lower even than how we ranked them)

Anyone in the darkroom trying to develop photos?
Throw one switch. If you hear a scream, well, that one controls the light. Throw the other switch. If you wake up with an ice pack on your noggin and the other guy has a bandaged hand, you now know that switch also controlled the light.

Otherwise, at night, throw a piece of photo paper under the door for each light switch thrown and develop to determine which switch caused the paper to go black.

... and no virgins here either.

When you say the shutter locks, do you mean you cannot press the shutter release? Or does the shutter lock open with the mirror up?
The first is expected, the later is a serious problem.

You'll need to download Pentax's Remote Assistant. You can configure it to dump photos to a folder. Then lightroom should be able to detect new images there and allow you to work on them. (I don't have light room so I can't say the exact behavior.)

Pentax has not released the APIs, so thee is no third party integration... which would be really nice... but the watched file should be perfectly sufficient and you can still make good use of the tethered shooting.

Try with card in, door open...

My thoughts are the ground is a bit flat and the sunbeams in the sky are a bit over exposed (maybe just a JPEG issue).
The sky may be natural/unedited, but it doesn't look natural. It looks like glacier ice. If that is natural, I suppose that is a big part of the draw.

I played with boosting the contrast (levels) a bit on the ground and narrowing the 'a' channel in Curves in Lab mode and it made the colors much more vibrant. I did not touch the sky, assuming the unusual look is part of why you took the photo to begin with.

But I do have to agree with Don, there is nothing so special that would make it award winning. It looks like a great area to be, maybe 30-60 minutes later.

FYI, Converting back to sRGB for the web seems to have killed any color boosting effect completely. I saved in AdobeRGB, so it may not look right unless you use FireFox3 or other color management aware browser. (MSIE is close but a bit flat.)

True... if I only had to deal with my camera store, I probably would have thought little of the experience -- other than feeling the devices being of rather questionable quality.

One of the Eleinchrom/Bogen reps was in the store when I took the lights back for repair. She expressed her irritation with how Elinchrom had handled the known defects. That probably tainted my views but it supported my experiences with regard to other issues.

Just a quick response to your question on DLites experience...

Nice little strobes. I like them a lot (have the DLites4).
Just beware... Elinchrom quality and support do NOT match their reputation!!

Within about 50 shots, my DLite4s died! They were shipped with a known issue of bad capacitors. Yes, I got them fixed for free under warranty, but only had them a couple of weeks and had to wait four to six more weeks to get them repaired.

I could go on for another page or two on Elinchrom experiences, but suffice to say, you may want to try other brands that still believe in customer satisfaction!