The da70 is a lovely lens with great rendition. The fa77 is half a notch above, though you pay a bit for that half notch. Either would be wonderful. I have the 70, love it's compactness and the results it delivers. The 77 is a little more versatile. Is the additional speed going to be worth the extra dosh. That's your decision ....

But which is the right audience? Spending £600-odd on a camera suggests a more than casual interest in photography. Yet I'm hard put to imagine anyone with that level of interest being prepared to accept the limitations (in some circumstances) of having only a screen to use in composing shots. Even on the P&S camera I occasionally use, with an *articulated* screen, the viewfinder is sometimes indispensable.

I like the look and promise of the K-01 well enough. I hope I'm wrong to wonder whether the lack of viewfinder isn't its Achilles' heel.

It's not always the customer's meanness. Some cannot see beyond the prices they'd expect to pay for a factory product or cannot use their imagination to see that what might be a pastime for them is a livelihood for someone else (nor can a few appreciate the significant difference in result). If I were to make a table, say, I often won't be able to buy the wood at a lesser price than Ikea charge for a finished article. (There I hope the comparison ends.). It's why so many professional woodworkers and photographers find themselves teaching courses etc -- and I am glad they do. But I suspect it points to an existence that can sometimes be precarious.

That's why the case was brought, but the law applied was copyright law, which is blind to corporate identity. It seems clear from the judgement that the judge struggled a bit with this. And, if I've read it correctly, much turned on the evidence that the defendant was aware of and inspired by the original photograph and set out to achieve a similar expression. In short, he chose not to pay a licence fee for the original photo (as others had done). No reason why he should have - he may have been unsatisfied with it - but he then set out to copy key elements of the original. As the judgement suggests, if the firm has engaged a freelance photographer to go and take a photo incorporating the same ingredients, there would have been no difficulty. Unless he/she too had known of and taken into account the original photograph!

I am not sure the judge's reasoning is watertight, but even if it is, I don't see a rush to the courts. The finding is more narrowly drawn on the particular circumstances of the case than a summary might suggest.

Very good set. The b&w my favourite, too.

Oops, hadn't read p.2 of this discussion...

Is the update any more worth doing than the last one for those of us who couldn't care less about GPS (on a camera)? Pentax don't refer to any other fixes, which I imagine they would if they existed (?).

A good set. My favourite is no.3 -- gives meaning to the phrase 'stretching to infinity'.

Tony -- just to acknowledge safe receipt of lens in excellent order. Thanks for despatching so promptly.

Christopher

Hi Tony - Just sent you a PM.