Here is an image in mikeyscope’s PU gallery with the K-5 and Pentax 67 SMC 165/2.8:

https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/user-9178/comet-c2011-l4-panstarrs---andromeda-...

Are you aware of the Mirex tilt-shift adapter? They have a version for Pentax 67 lenses for many different mounts, including Pentax K. Joe Cornish and Tim Parkin use the Mirex with Sony A7 cameras, and are very positive about the Mirex adapter:

http://www.mirex-adapter.de/preisliste.htm

Regarding Pentax 67 lenses on Pentax aps-c bodies, I have briefly used some of my Pentax 67 lenses on the K-5 with the Pentax 67-K adapter. The top Pentax 67 lenses like the SMC 45/4, SMC 105/2.4 and the SMC 165/2.8 should be just as good on an aps-c Pentax as they are on the Pentax 67. Forum member "mikeyscope" (Mike Dickson) uses many of his Pentax 67 lenses on Pentax DSLRs for outstanding astrophotography, so resolution and sharpness should not be an issue. The main disadvantage with these 67 lenses are that they are big and heavy.

PF have published an in-depth review of the DA* 11-18 today. It seems to be an excellent performer. Unfortunately there is no comparison with the DA 12-24.

Here is a link to the Flickr gallery to the wonderful Estonian photographer Margus Sootla. He shots mainly Pentax 67ii and the older Pentax 6x7 cameras, and he develops and drum scans the film himself. I like his work very much.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tsiklonaut/

In 2012 I sold an old saxophone that I did not use (I have others that I play on), and purchased a very nice Pentax 67ii system (45mm - 105mm - 165mm). Later I added the 55-100/4.5 zoom. The 67ii is a wonderful camera, however there are several aspects to consider when shooting medium format film in 2019.

Positive:
- The Pentax 67ii is has a very simple layout, it is very intuitive to use.
- Gigantic viewfinder.
- Large selection of lenses.
- Many high quality lenses, for example the SMC versions (latest versions) of the 45mm, 55mm, 105mm, 100mm macro, 200mm. The 67 tele lenses 300mm EDIF, 400mm EDIF and 800mm EDIF are all legendary and superb.
- The 67ii AE finder is very good, no need for an external lightmeter.
- The 67ii is quite robust, and has been used by both studio photographers and landscape photographers. The earlier versions, 6x7 and 67, are possibly even more robust, having less electronics inside.
- It is nice to work with an analogue medium.

Negative:
- The Pentax 67ii is becoming more and more expensive.
- Film is very expensive, and who knows how long Fuji or Kodak will be interested in producing colour film, especially slide film.
- Medium format scanners is a problem area. The great scanners made 20 years ago, Nikon Coolscan 8000/9000, Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and Flextight/Imacon, are all selling now for absurd money. At the same time there are hardly any repair workshops or parts available. So investing heavily into one of these scanners is quite risky. I myself purchased a new Epson V750 flatbed scanner, and the results I am getting from 120 film is "good enough". I am lucky enough to own a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 scanner for 35mm film, and the results from this scanners blows 120 film scans from the Epson V750 "out of the water". For me it is a bit of a paradox to shoot medium format film, when the scans that I end up with are inferior to my 35mm film scans. The future for film scanning is probably DSLR scanning. I have seen great results from Pentax K-1 pixel shift scans of medium format film, where one has taken several shots of the 120 slide or negative and stiched them together in Photoshop or Lightroom. This method of DSLR scanning medium format film (and large format: 4x5 and 8x10) is very time consuming and cumbersome, but can produce excellent quality digital files. It is also possible to get the films scanned when processed at a photo lab, but then you have little control over the process.

*It is important to mention that I do not have a darkroom, nor do I develop film myself.

As a conclusion I must say that I find using a combination of digital cameras and film cameras very rewarding. Hopefully will digital camera sensor technology develop further and make DSLR scanning more convenient with better results.

PS: The use of the word pair positive/negative when discussing film is a bit strange, maybe pros/cons would have been better

Thank you John! The user reviews at PF are interesting, hopefully an in-depth review will surface in the near future. I am especially interested in a comparison between the DA* 11-18 and the DA 12-24.

I have been waiting for in-depth reviews and/or reports from users of this zoom, but so far I have found almost nothing. Does anybody here on PU have experience with this lens?

I also have a K20D that I have been planning to IR convert. I believe the K20D is less difficult to convert than for example the K5 (possibly due to the sensor cleaning mechanism). Anyway, this is where I will send my camera when I decide to go for an IR conversation:

https://www.spencerscamera.com/index.cfm

If you do end up with converting your K20D, please share your experiences with the process and results!

Great collection of images. My immediate favourites are number 7 + 10. Thank you for sharing!

I have sent films to the Darkroom lab in Cheltenham for processing several times, and been very happy with the results. I will definitely use them again, especially for E6 (since there are no E6 labs left in Norway).

https://www.the-darkroom.co.uk/