Ditto -- a much more intuitive interface than Photoshop, which gathers figurative dust on my computer. I know PS is capable of whizzy things, but for me Lightroom does 99% of what I need and unsurprisingly does that 99% as well as PS.

I appreciate that the sky won't fall in in this particular instance, but in general IP is not overrated. Individuals benefit from it, not just multinationals. Many people rely on it to protect their livelihood. You are right that the digital turn has put it under unprecedented pressure; but unless it or something very like it is respected, it's difficult to see how many kinds of endeavour could keep going.

I suppose I just feel that less is usually more. But no beef about it, for sure. Just a view.

One element in the Gallery I appreciate is the ability to look up the exif data and to see what settings were used to capture a particular picture. I can't see a similar facility in 'my photos', but perhaps I can't see it for looking ...

The weakness of the gallery is the unlimited upload facility, which (without any hurdles to jump) hardly encourages much of a process of self-criticism/-selection.

Eg http://www.ebay.co.uk/ctg/Pentax-Optio-I10-121-MP-Digital-Camera-Black-/10018649...

... any colour so long as it's black, I'm afraid.

Amazon must get a lot of claims of this nature, given the size of their operation. Their (tendentious) letter to you will be one of several possible pro-forma responses. The fact that they are making a 'no fault' offer, however inadequate, suggests that they realise you could have a legitimate claim. It really doesn't matter whether the fault is common or not. The chief consideration is that they have sold you a camera that has stopped working after 18 months of normal use. I suspect they will continue to deny their obligations until it is clear that you are going to persist. I doubt they will want to risk the small claims court - much easier and cheaper to settle.

I use the 15 Ltd a good deal. I have a 17-70, so that's my closest to your 16-45. The obvious difference is size and weight. The 15 is just such a delight to have on the front of the camera. It's colour rendition is excellent. It is sharp in the centre from f4 but needs stopping down if edge sharpness is important for a shot. It is certainly better in all respects than the 17-70 at its widest, though you'll probably only notice some of that when printing large. Although it is a good lens for landscape, I think it really excels when the main subject is in reasonably close (centre) view, framed by the 15's generous backdrop.

Second that. My original request was quite modest/lighthearted (I thought). Didn't mean to start the language wars....

It could in principle be 'can I' but dougf8 is correct to suppose that I really meant - and should have written - 'may I'.

On the other hand, ronniemac, your local dictionary (I notice you are from Oxford) gives a 'z' spelling as its first preference for 'recognize', with 's' as an alternative.

johnriley and Algernon are correct to suggest that spelling and grammar are not immutable. Even elements that are helpful to sense (such as the possessive apostrophe) are liable to erosion over time and new habits and practices are always on the march.

And let's not forget the photographer's motto - that a picture is worth a thousand words, whatever their spelling.

OK, can I occupy pedant's corner for a while? I do not get uptight about spelling on a forum. A certain rough and readiness is in tune with the usual hesitations and uncertainties of conversation. But we are all photographers (or at least aspiring to be), so I wonder if we can agree to get one word right in its singular and plural forms?

LENS not LENSE for one

LENSES not any other variants for more than one.

I have no hope of change, but I think I must have seen one more 'lense' this morning than was good for me. Perhaps it is jealousy, perhaps I just recognize that some of those who own a 'lense' take better photos than I do with my orphographically correct lens.