and what Peter is saying is that in making such a stipulation you are in breach of your PayPal contract in doing so.

As Yves says, the lens correction information is supposedly stored in the RAW files. If your RAW converter supports the feature then it will use it to correct the image. Apparently the latest Adobe RAW converter included an update to do this, as does the shipped Pentax software (which I'm not impressed with).

So far, that is not my experience with the K-7. On the contrary, it seems the same to better that the K20D to me so far.

Thank Lance. Yes, I am shooting DNG at present and SilkyPix v3 is handling them just fine. I'm not sure whether I'll go back to PEF now that the DNG files are compressed in the K-7.

I don't do high ISO shots. The photos I've taken so far (not a huge number) seem to show either the same or actually less noise on the K-7 compared to the K20D, contrary to what others say. Then again, I'm not trying to take photos at ISO1600+ (I generally use ISO200/400 with DR enabled). I'm firmly with George on the question about pixel-peeping, it holds no interest for me. The relative noise levels seem wholly irrelevant to me so long as the detail is there and smeared out of the way with NR.

Lovely. Looks like a good day out.

Hi Les, just a hop, skip and a jump from me (Woodley, Reading).

It looks like one of those optical illusions Very well done.

Those are funny ebay listings

Huh, RRP for the Pentax DA 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 AL WR seems high at AUD 399, when it only cost me 20 quid extra with the K-7. I guess that's some recompense for the high price of the K-7

My experience with TC's on these lenses shows me that it's better to crop the original image rather than bother with a TC on a 500mm lens. The drop off in IQ, as Oggy says, is greater than that by zooming and cropping a normal image. You'd probably need blazing sunshine and stopping down significantly to see any real advantage. YMMV.