More a lesson for brides and bridegrooms to be...

Don't entrust anything important to morons.

Wouldn't mind seeing the non-Topazed version.

Nice rainbow - quite unusual to see as much of the bow as this in a subarban setting. It would be awesome if the secondary was also complete!

I like the picture, and I'd like to see a larger version too.

However, any reason for the speckly, off-centre frame thingy? I find it very distracting, but then you know I usually hate the frames

I do very much agree with this.

Apart from the low noise 'advantage', which is so last-decade, the only clear advantage of the bigger sensor is the depth of field with wide angle lenses.

Which is definitely not worth doubling the price and the weight for, in my book (yes, I know it probably isn't actually doubling, but ykwim)

The other apparent advantage is the ability to use old lenses to the full again. However, all those old lenses with their not-very-perpendicular-to-the-sensor light paths will be quite disappointing towards the edges of the FF image circle, I suspect.

Yes, but you still have all the bulk of the FF body.

It's not just a few extra mm for the sensor - it's all the electromagnets in there to shake it about, which will have to be stronger.

Anything heading towards £2k will be a loooooong way out of my league for a loooooooong time, so I hope they aren't going to abandon APS-C too.

Not sure I'd agree with 'never', unless you don't count the Bigma as 'very big'.

I use this Think Tank bag to cart the K-5 around with the Bigma on it when I go to airfields, and it's pretty well protected, I think.

You really needn't.

If any SLR mount was so weedy as to need picking up by the camera as well as the lens, they would fall off in their hordes as soon as people mounted a big lens by using its tripod mount.

In fact, picking them up by the camera is more risky with a big lens.

I've picked cameras up mostly by the lens for 30 years, never had it fall off yet.

Going back on topic, I've heard this view expressed quite a few times, and I'm quite puzzled by it. I haven't done all that much with the K-5 yet, despite having had it for eight months or so, but of the 1400 images I've taken with it, I much prefer them to the K10D's ones.

Can someone be more specific, ideally with examples to illustrate the difference?

My impression is that dynamic range is much better rendered on the K-5, leading to an image that much better resembles what I saw than it usually did on the K10D.

Any of the remote or delayed release modes turn SR off automatically.

There is no need to change the setting manually for these.

Well you say that, but my justification is my direct experience.

I'm afraid I don't have your touching faith. If my experience was like yours, all positive, I probably would.

The problem is in the terms.

JPS's procedure is for someone to send in the equipment for quote, together with their PU number.

As Barrie put very simply, they require you to "supply a request for a discount before being given a base price".

Is it so hard to understand that this is intrinsically open to abuse?