I agree with the essence of what Fatspider says. You should of course keep your tone neutral and factual and not threaten. You may have to take your claim to the Small Claims Court - which is not as intimidating or difficult as it may sound - and if you do you will want the record of your dealings with the company to be one of sweet reasonableness. You will be better off, I'd suggest, If you follow a form letter. There are plenty about. Here's one:
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/theoneshow/txt/soga_letter_2.doc

You have a case and should not be brushed off with this warranty claptrap. A manufactuer's warranty has nothing to do with your rights and the retailer's obligations under the Sale of Goods Act. Mifsuds is in Devon, right? Devonian retailers are as subject to the Act as those in London or Aberdeen.

George -- just received the flashgun, in excellent order. Many thanks.
Chris

I'm sure this is, strictly speaking, correct ... except for the implication hovering over that last sentence that third-party is by dint of being third-party, inferior in performance to Pentax. There is of course no evidence that that is invariably so. And without evidence, all we're left with is assertion. I'm happy to use Pentax and third-party lenses, as I suspect are most people. I'm also glad to use a Pentax battery and a selected third-party battery. The only substantive difference in the batteries is the price.

On the face of it, that does seem sharp practice or at best (on Johnson's part) inconsistency rolled into coincidence. My view on the fee is that the site doesn't run itself for free, will not pull in a great deal of revenue from advertising, given its (in Internet terms) limited traffic, and needs the support of those who use it. Quite rightly, those who use it are not obliged to pay an access fee; but those who can afford it, and derive benefit from the site, might consider it a worthy (and self-interested!) cause.

PM sent re flash

Very close. The DA lens may have the edge, but that could be a difference in colouring that's deceiving the eye.

It depends on the building and how close to it you have to be. Probably wouldn't suit Shanghai

The 31 will do much of what you want. Its effect, after all, is pretty close to that of a 'standard' lens on a 35mm camera. You will find yourself getting pretty close to people for a head and shoulders shot and for some buildings you might sometimes wish for a wider angle. But I suspect you'll find these occasional limitations outweighed by the lens's many virtues. The current cost of a new 31 is pretty eye-watering and the improvement over the 35 macro, however real and desirable, is an expensive gain. Very subjectively, I'd say you might be getting a 10-15% 'better' lens for triple the investment. Of course these marginal gains never come cheap.

If you haven't already seen it, you might find https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/da-70mm-vs-fa-77mm-limited-comparison/intro...
of interest.

I have the 15 and 31 (and 70). I love the DA15. I like them all and the FA31 and DA70 are optically better lenses -- but that is partly saying no more than that the longer focal lengths give the lens-maker fewer challenges. If I was forced to give up all but one lens, it'd be the 15 still sitting on my camera. Holding on to the 31 would make most sense (an exceptional and versatile lens), but it's a heart/head thing! I haven't tried the 12-24 but it has the reputation of being a good lens and offers a little more versatility than the 15 -- though bulky and has seen an increase in price 'overnight' from c.£600 to c£800.