You won't need to af adjust if it's like my mkii. We'll done on the upgrade I was very happy with that upgrade.

All looks good, if they where cropped before being sent to the paper then the exif data most likely would have been stripped on saving hence it then becoming an orphan work and this situation arising.

I would call any camera 'pro' if it had an excellent repair and replacement / loan service available to it. Handling also makes a difference. The current Pentax DSLR line up beats any non pro bodies and more than matches any pro bodied interface / button placement / ergonomics.

Any DSLR released in the last 18 months would easily beat on spec and performance a DSLR built even 5 years ago.

No newspaper is going to publish a photo with a watermark on it this just doesn't happen. What would have happened is the picture editor most likely looked through the image metadata saw no copyright notification or editorial instructions by yourself and so put the image up without a credit.

As for hassling for an apology or update just makes you out to be a bit of a pita. I would let it go but tell the bikers family in future you must get a credit. I would also consider filling in all the metadata within the image and supplying them with a new JPEG so this doesn't happen again.

It's not just lower noise but the type of noise between ff and crop sensors. The noise on ff seems so more refined than crop sensor noise.

I would say the crop is more to fit on the page rather than to crop out your name.

Newspapers share images all the time particular within stable papers. Images from our local paper for example will end up in the daily mail if there is a national interest. This happened recently when sacha baron Cohen appeared in a pub in Cleethorpes doing some film research. The local paper saw a local guys camera phone image on twitter and asked if they could use it, the same image was then shared around various uk newspapers with the mail group earning licensing rights and the guy on twitter earnt nothing.

So did you send them your photo to use Peter?

I think it also depends on the lenses purchased with the new ff body. There is also a learn curve of using a new system, I admit I found the changeover difficult at first and still learning, Pentax just seems more natural to use and tends to have similarity across the range. I have two bodies in my new system an ff and a crop sensor body and yet they are so different to use.

As for expensive to change over I sold all my Pentax gear and replaced it all with the same spec lenses and it cost me £100 on top of my Pentax stuff and I ended up with a sigma 100-300mm f/4 to replace my tokina 100-300 f/4 mf lens. I do wonder if when a Pentax ff does appear if I will be able to afford to swap back again.

A couple of years ago I would have agreed on a lower pixel count ff sensor Pentax body, however as camera processing power in increases this need for smaller sensors is reduced. The processing power on the k-3 shows this increased power in terms of speed and performance. I also think the 24 megapixel Sensor should be considered a minimum if Pentax want to compete with other branded ff bodies. Imagine a 24 megapixel ff 10ffps Pentax body in a k-3 sized body whose not going to want one of those if the price is right???

I have been happy with both the DA* lenses I have owned the 16-50mm and the 50-135mm. I certainly hope any FD* or DF* or whatever Pentax decide to call the FF* lenses for the FF body are as good as those lenses.

You can now put purchases up to £100,000 as expenses now, which is even better