No need to apologise for stirring up debate - debates are good.

But hiding the fact that the pictures were from the D300 just makes it seem like you're taking the p***, even if you weren't.

If the D300's AF is so good that you can reliably get pics of birds in flight as sharp as that, then there's no doubting that it's superior to the K10D in that respect, and probably to the K20D as well.

Get the tool that does the job you want to do, at a price you're prepared to pay - no big deal.

If I had unlimited funds, I'd probably get a D3

I was wondering what the hidden agenda was too... obvious come to think of it.

Maybe all this silliness would stop if we just said "yes Pete, the D300 (or whatever he's got now) is far better than any Pentax."

It's 'aperture', goddammit, not 'aperature'.

And 'lens', not 'lense'.

[Ah, I feel so much better now.]

I've only had the Remote F, and I've never had a problem. Quite apart from it doing everything I need, I like not having to open up the door on the side in order to connect it.

On the K10D, of course, there's a custom setting that runs the AF before firing, so it pretty much gives you everything a 'half-press' gives you.

Yeah... Clarky's camera (and lens) does take a cracking photo...

Interesting to know.

Though since I'll probably never use two filters at a time, and all I need is the 77mm adaptor and something sharp, it sounds like the Cokin route is likely to be easiest.

Famous last words... you know I'll need the ND grad and the polariser as soon as I'm done with the knife...

Good point.

I have a Cokin P holder and polariser... just not a 77mm adaptor.

Could you hint at the hacking required, Matt?

Well, back from the Lakes. Fabulous weather, sunny most of the time (although that often meant boring light).

Very pleased to have chosen the 10-20 - it was hardly off the camera.

I haven't even nearly finished sorting through the pictures, most of which are pretty rubbish (just snaps, as in 'did we really get down from up there? ') , but I'll post a few in due course.

Thanks, people, for all your advice and encouragement to go wide. I still want the 18-250 though. On the occasions I wanted long, it was a right faff.

Edit: I've got a bone to pick with Chris though. Why on earth didn't you remind me that I needed a polariser for it

Doh... that hadn't even occurred to me. I did say I went out without breakfast...

So, can you guess which one I got:






I got up specially early (no breakfast!!) to beat the traffic... Chris's directions and parking advice was spot on, and he had one of each of the Sigma 10-20, and the Pentax 18-250 ready for me to try.

I was stunned by the small size of the 18-250 - it's smaller closed up than my trusty FA 28-200, and maybe even a bit lighter. I took a couple of shots with it, but even in the viewfinder the expected barrel distortion at the wide end was very apparent, and although I know it's correctable, it did put me off a bit.

Not criticising the 18-250 at all - even in the minute or two I had it on the camera, I could tell straightaway that it would handle nicely, and despite the fairly dim light in Chris's store, I wasn't at all disappointed with its focusing speed.

But then I tried the 10-20, and the decision was easy. As people have said, it just makes all kinds of photos possible that I've never had access to before. The perspectives possible just blew me away.

I'll post some more impressions in due course.

A real pleasure to meet Chris face to face at last... I know he'll kill me for this, but here he is...

-------------
Edit: fabulous portrait moved to the comps thread
-------------


Oh, and would you believe, right next door to SRS is an outdoors shop, and they had a trekking pole/monopod - one of these, as someone suggested, so thanks very much - I'm all sorted now.