You are in elevated company: at the Leveson enquiry, our Prime Minister was himself a bit of befuddled by LOL, which to press amusement he thought signified 'lots of love'.

RussV wrote:
I'm looking forward to seeing all the brilliant FF pictures that couldn't be taken on APS-C

*****
The terminology doesn't help.

Full frame suggests anything less needs topping up. A crop sensor can produce impressive images, with good detail and colour depth. It's possible to print the result up to A3 size (and often to A2). For some subjects, FF is undoubtedly a good investment for amateurs (as well as professionals), but it isn't any sort of panacea.

When I look at the galleries of some of those who are clamouring for FF (and a few who have been persuaded to make the transition rather than wait on Pentax), I can sometimes see the sense of the move. Anyone who earns money from the sale of prints of landscapes, eg, might well be well-advised to consider the move. But at other times I'm left wondering what benefit FF will bring to photographers who hitherto have not yet seemed to make the most of their APSC kit.

Inflation tables have to be used with caution. They usually provide an average, which will contain types of goods that are inflating at different rates, some much faster than others. A more precise guide is to look at income levels and ask how many hours a person would need to work to buy (say!) camera 1 in 19xx as opposed to camera 2 in 20xx.

But in general, as cameras have transformed from being mainly precision mechanical or simple electro-mechanical devices to the digital cameras we know today, prices in real terms have fallen somewhat, and that trend has been maintained by moving manufacture from the relatively high-wage economy of Japan to lower-wage economies.

So, is the K3 a bargain? Or was the LX so expensive in real terms? Probably neither. But undoubtedly both are desirable cameras. They do not depreciate in value quite as fast as cars, though looking at what I paid for a K5 a few years ago (seems like yesterday) and what it's worth today, they are not too far behind . I'm not going to be an early adopter of the K3, but at some stage perhaps ...

The theme this week is 'worn out'. If you have a shot that is relevant, why not upload it via the 'Gallery' tab?

It's odd how routine can blind a person to the obvious. You are of course right. I shall start exploiting User Mode, which I've neglected for several years!

Spot on. It all comes down to individual preference of course, but manual has the greatest versatility -- I particularly like (by using manual) to avoid faffing around with a separate exposure compensation dial. About the only thing it won't readily do for me is set ISO. BTW am I alone in wishing ISO would revert to an operator-set default ISO when the camera's turned off?

I'm going to stick my neck out and suggest the photo is a fake: look at the crude cut of the surface material around the bump. Surely even per-production models would be better constructed.

I'm not offering to eat my hat if wrong

DSLRs tend to be aesthetically challenged. But, yes, the LH bump doesn't look v organic to the design. I sympathise with the designers to some extent, though. I expect their brief was to keep close to the K7/5 bodyform, yet find somewhere to house the GPS (if that's what it is).

The first is wonderful -- that said by someone usually pretty indifferent to insects as subjects

I'll keep my movie-maker ambitions in check (not a hardship).

But the new model sounds as though it may owe a bit more to evolution than revolution. Nothing wrong with that (revolutions often go wrong), but Pentax does need some cheering from the balconies rather than polite applause.... we shall see soon enough.