Heavens, I know we have the occasional hint of "Pentax good, Sigma bad" around these parts, but Sigma isn't that bad, I hope...

This is pretty much the conclusion I was coming to - coupled with the inevitable variation you'll get amongst the details.

That and the nutcases that bid without researching the new prices, I guess.

There certainly were a couple of bidders at each other's throats over the 170-500, but the winner was a last-second sniper, who hadn't bid at all previously, so wouldn't have been caught up in the flush of the battle.

Anyway, if the one I picked up today is in as good nick as the seller claims, then there'll be a MF Sigma 400 up for sale soon. I bought it from Mannesty; it was lovely then, and I haven't made it any worse. The only reason I'm switching to the AF version is that I also have the Pentax SMC-A MF 400mm, equally well-cared for prior to its coming into my hands by another one of our own.

The Sigma is delightfully light and much more usable than the Pentax, albeit optically not as good, but if I'm out in the field with it, I'd like the choice of AF.

So if anyone wants to make me an offer, feel free.

Ok, so what's going on with eBay prices at the moment?

A Sigma 170-500 that I was watching finally goes for £392, just 60-odd quid short of the brand new price at Microglobe. I'd been watching it - I'd have been interested up to about £300, but once you get much above that the attraction of a new lens with a warranty starts to catch my eye and I lose interest in the one that's been out on safari.

Then there's the AF360 FGZ that's currently standing at £123, with our very own Chris@SRS offering them new at not an awful lot more than that.

And then there are the Sigma 400s. An AF one went recently for £187, I kid you not. I picked up a black one earlier today for £155, and another (grey one) went just now for only £126.

A-series 50mm 1.7s are about twice what they were 6 months ago, and the F2s can be got for a song attached to quite decent cameras.

I can understand that there's something of a scrabble for decent Pentax and Pentax-mount glass, now that the '10 and the '100 are the talk of the town..

.. but there doesn't seem to be much of a pattern other than "Ooh K, and ooh A, here's some money".

Is there one?

This was the review I was half-remembering...

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/reviews/elitecoolscan.htm

ISTR from the reviews I read that the Nikon Coolscan V ED (is this the same as the one you mention, Wintoid?) isn't very good with black and white, or indeed with Kodachrome. Can't remember why, something to do with the silver grains in the B&W or something. Don't take my word for it, though - DYOR...

I think it's safe to say that you and I aren't the only two people on this forum who thought EXACTLY that when having a look through these.

I came across WTD recently. It hasn't supplanted Dilbert as "best syndicated cartoon of all time" for me, but I do like it.

Basically, there are 7 contacts on the camera mount, but only 6 on the Jessops tubes.

But for the camera to swap aperture information with the lens, it seems that the 7th contact needs to be shorted through the metal of the tubes to the lens.

However the tubes are painted, so the 7th contact touches only an insulator.

The solution is to scrape a bit of paint off the tubes, where the 7th contact touches, thus:




Smoke and mirrors, but it works.

All credit to Mannesty for I got the idea for the fix from him. All I did was attack the tubes with a sharp instrument one night. They work fine now, and being able to set the aperture from the body is very handy.

I'd agree with this, if it is manual focus only.
My experience with a set of Jessops PK/A tubes has been excellent. They needed a little (simple) modification before they communicated aperture information between the lens and the camera, but they fit fine and I use them a lot.
If I saw a Pentax PK/A or better still, AF, set, I'd probably try and get them.
True, but it's still nice to be able to set the aperture from the body.

Well I've received the book, now. It's in quite good condition - the dust cover is a bit battered, and the corners a bit bent, but apart from that it's fine.

But £6.99 is a steal, especially since the prices on the Amazon marketplace now range from £64 to £117 - and that's second hand, not new.

Any idea why it's so expensive? It was only £15.99 new...

Anyway, it looks very interesting, and I'm looking forward to reading it. Thanks again for the recommendation, John.