The HDR is maked from one photo so you can make the HDR with curves if you want. I never know why someone would create 3 photos out of one photo and merge them back together again, it just sound weird to beging with.

No it's just a range that is used by many type of phtography and all come in his own place really.
The 16-45 is the cheap wonder lens which is superb for his price so we can forgive his little faults completly.
The 16-50 is a little overpriced if you compare it with the 16-45 but you get back weather-sealing, wider arperture and a better built quality.
The 17-70 is made to replace the 16-45 so far as I know but it just isn't that cheap as the 16-45 so if you don't use the extra range it isn't really worth it over the 16-45.

so get the 16-45 if it fits your bill.
if you need the extra range the 17-70 would be great.
if you need weather sealing or the wider arpeture get the 16-50.
It really isn't that hard

Wow one is holy, the FA 77 Ltd is sprinkled with ferrydust so what about the FA 43 Ltd?

there is also the DA 17-70 the little bit of extra reach is handy with portraits.
The lens is more expensive then the 16-45 and it has the same sharpeness but the 17-70 and the 16-50 don't have so much Chromatic Aberrations.
Some users say it also have a better bokeh but I don't have those lenses so cant compare them really.
The 16-45 is still a superb good lens for that money though

The last image doesn't feel natural anymore... I atleast dont like it to be honest.

Maybe if you play some with the curves on your psuedo hdr image you can get some mist back but still keep the stones like that

You said it yourself Paul so don't worry they are more then good enough so go out there and make some more.

the D-FA 100mm would be my choice, i can do (almost) everything with that glass and it's still very light and easy to use.
Pentax has really have the best prime lenses out there so it would be pitty not to use them

don't know about the sigma lens but two CPL wouldn't work.
They both cut away a wave length and if they are 90 degrees to each other they wont let any light through even and it's cheaper to buy an ND filter to be honest.

Don't worry too much Benoît, most of the time they are friendly.
There are just some missunderstandings I believe, Ken has worded himself a bit wrong sometimes and Martin is taken it just a bit too personal since it wasnt directly aimed at him when it started so just end it you boys.

The more experience photographs are always helpfull if you ask them something, everyone on this forum has been very helpfull to be honest.
But we cant expect off someone to leave a C&C for every photo. If you really want somone C&C just ask them and you will get it I believe.
The gallery also isn't the place to have conversations like most of you agree here if you want C&C the My Photo section in the forum is so much better to use for that.

To go back to the topic, how many off you think there are too many "bad" photos in the gallery? If you look at other forums you will see that it really isnt that bad here so to be frank i dont think there is a real problem and no need for anything to change.
I know i make some comments but i got carried away in the thought flow here

wow i missed the last photos they are very good, you and Prieni make a good team it seems