There is a better one than the Pentax version, made by KPS on ebay, made in Korea but there are ones on sale from UK sellers. It is better made than the Pentax one, with better, sharper optics and it clamps onto the Pentax eyepece with screws, whereas the Pentax one simply pushes on and can fall off. I have tried both. The KPS one also has slightly higher magnification.

The Nikon eyepiece mag for the Nikon D90 (Nikon DK-21M) also fits on Pentax DSLR's and is cheaper than the Pentax one...and just as good,

I have seen a Sigma SD14 converted professionally to a Nikon F mount....

"I'm pretty much sold on the concept of the WR lenses - very liberating to be able to carry on shooting in the rain"

John, I have been shooting in all weathers for 30years with non WR lenses of all brands and types and NEVER had any problems. This 'waterproof' WR lens thing is just some marketing ploy and you seem to have fallen for it.

Hiya,

John, I normally agree with your often common sense views, however on this occasion I could not disagree more with your negative view.

Both Sigma and Fuji have chosen, bravely, to take their own DSLR route rather than follow the herd like sheep. If you do a fair bit of research you will see that both of them have good reason to do so. All digital sensors, like most things have pro's & con's and the paths that Sigma & Fuji have taken just have a different set of pro's and con's. It is a fact that the image 'style' or 'motif' of both Sigma and Fuji DSLR's ARE different to the mainstream CCD/CMOS sensors.

It may be a minority that use Fuji/Sigma, but it is a large minority and both of them have a very good cult following, who appreciate the benefits that they see that Sigma/Fuji sensors give them.

If it were not for companies like Fuji/Sigma who challenge the commonly held views, then there would be far less innovation and that would be a bad thing.

And as for Sigma DSLR owners having little choice of lenses? Have you seen the Sigma range? HUGE; far, far, larger than the current Pentax lens range and Sigma lenses have superb build, excellent image quality and (unlike Pentax) excellent pricing. I think anyone who cannot make superb images from that massive range of lenses needs help. As far as I see tha only gap in the Sigma lens range is a shift lens, hardly an issue for 99.9% of photographers.

And how are Sigma/Fuji sensors any more of a 'dead end' than the CCD/CMOS sensors? I fail to see any logic there.

Sorry to take such issue, but all of us need companies like them.

cheers Steve.

I use Pentax, have used all the main brands...however, I go to the NEC Focus show each year and two years ago Sigma had a large show of VERY large prints (about 2 feet by 18 inches) from the SD14 and I was very, very impressed indeed. Ignore snide and biased comments, judge for yourself, but I too am very intrigued with the SD14 & new SD15.

I suggest you do LOTS of googling...there are several specialist SD sites and forums.

cheers Steve.

A properly 'fast' 35mm; a DA 35/1.8 or 35/1.4.

A DA 10/2.8.

Canon make terrific kit, no matter what anyone here says. They can teach Pentax plenty about autofocus performance and ergonomics...

Hardly a 'masterstroke' nor 'genius'....Nikon has had the DX 35mm f1.8 ...YES f1.8, for some time...and at about £170. How is it that Pentax can only manage an f2.4, which is NOT a 'fast' lens by any modern standards....

BEWARE Mr Cad....one of those dubious London dealers. VERY poor condition items....NEVER buy from them unless you are face to face with them and can inspect the lenses first.

"I paid good money for my DSLRs, as I want the best quality and low noise.
Why would I want to select JPEG and throw information away"

Just because one option has the 'higher' numbers or the higher bit count is totally irrelevant if the viewer of the photo is totally unable to see them.....

You might buy a Ferrari which is clearly FAR superior to a Ford Focus, but you will never get anything like the performance available out of the Ferrari under 95% of UK road conditions...likewise under many shooting conditions AND depending on how the finished photo is enlarged/printed/displayed, a RAW shot may be totally pointless unless the finished article can show the possible RAW improvement.

Do not be fooled by numbers or test conditions, as many cameras & lenses can be seen to perform quite differently in real world useage.