Why would you want to run a 13" laptop at 3200 resolution though? That's just ridiculous. Maybe 1900 but any higher and it becomes impossible to see anything...

As I thought I just found that review and it stated hardly any software worked at that resolution as the icons where too small to see.

So it's not an elements issue but a windows problem with qhd display. It's a bit bad when Microsoft cannot keep its operating system upto scratch with hardware developments.

If you an afford a dell XPS with that resolution why would you run elements on it? In fact why would you run any software at that resolution the images and icons would be tiny on a 15" screen.

Sounds like you are using an older version of elements

I still can't believe in this age of the smartphone that there still hasn't been a dslr with a built in smartphone similar to what samsung did.

This would do more for dslr sales than anything else.

Getting the images from dslr to Internet is far to long, complicated and requires more kit than necessary.

Imagine a dslr with a touch screen and android OS. The possibilities would be endless. Pentax are already half way there with the KS-1 add a nano sim slot and android and away you go...

Been laptop based for around 7 years now. Most modern machines will run lightroom and Photoshop fine.

The screen keyboard and trackpad are more important for image work.

When at home I have mine plugged into a dell 23" ultrasharp monitor.

I even use my iPad mini 2 for editing on. Photogene and Photoshop work fine on the iPad showing how little processing power is required for photo editing.

The store problem is the same for all brands though.

Most independent camera stores I go in that are selling canon or nikon do not stock pro models or even more advanced than say around £600 and has been the case for many years.

In order for me to try pro models I usually have to make a trip to Manchester and usually Jessops at that!

This is why online reviews are now crucial and as we have seen with problems like sensors on early k-5 or sum problems on certain lenses can cause panick amongst a brand fraternity. Usually doing more harm than any marketing can counter....

The dslr pro market changes so rapidly and trying to second guess needs a crystal ball.

In the last year I have seen a large number of pro shooters move to cheaper bodies. So the usual 1d shooter has moved to two 5d mkii and nikon d3 / d4 owners are moving to two d750 bodies.

As sensor low light capability increases and af speed on lower priced bodies catches up with top line pro bodies even the pros are asking why spend all that money on a top line body when you can have 95% of the functionality for half the price.

If pentax don't bring it it an ff soon my next body will be the d750 it takes up everything that's missing on my d600

Better low light af
Better af tracking
Even better low light sensor capability

All that for £1799!

Pentax ff body has its work cut out already, I'm sure the Pentax ff body will be great but it has to compete on price too.

As for medium format most pro's I know rent MF bodies as part of the clients bill so whilst the 645z is an awesome piece of kit it's not going to replace hasselblad or phase one just yet, if you was a pro on a £3000 a day day rate are you going to hire a pentax or a hasselblad particularly if your client is going to be present?

I would also use the Getty calculator which has a 70/30 split 30% to the photographer.

Whilst you may see only a slight difference in quality between the star and non star lenses, the added creativity from faster lenses is a major factor in their cost appreciation.

I owned bother 16-50 and 50-135 and they where both a joy to own.