For me, so far, MF has been a new experience after 35mm. The huge viewfinder and fact that I can change film type/speed mid-roll just by swapping film backs are very welcome, as are the interchangeable viewfinders. I've no intention of getting rid of my Pentax 35mm bodies as there are situations where you don't want to lug two and a half kilos of Bronica around (which definitely won't fit in a pocket and attracts a lot more attention than an MX and prime lens!) I also intend to try all the various Ilford film types as with 15 shots to a roll I can see the difference quickly.

I will however have to get the enlarger set up and go back to printing them the old-fashioned way, as the computer simply can't cope with scanning them at the resolution needed. To get a decent image after cropping and enlarging each frame of negative you need to scan at high resolution, which seems to cause the computer to lock up and crash the scanner program! I will instead print the best ones then scan the prints in future. The results should be very acceptable with a good quality enlarger and Ilford paper. 35mm can be scanned directly but my negative scanner won't take 120 film.

MZ-10. Despite being a "double digit" body with plastic lens mount it has the full KAF2 mount as opposed to the "crippled" one on the MZ-30/50/60, so to use that F lens in Av mode you just turn the aperture ring.

Definitely worth doing. I use my KX as the backup body for everything, as it doesn't need batteries to function and is built like a tank. It was last used for a roll of SFX, where the all-manual design proved very helpful in calculating the correct exposure with a filter too dark to see the meter readings through (just set it up, add filter, turn shutter speed down seven stops and use a cable release/your watch in "B" for anything longer than a second).

I read a comment on the excellent "Inspector Gadget" Police blog during the recent snow. One copper suggested that as their station had functioned perfectly for the week they could safely fire the various managers and desk jockeys who'd failed to make it into work, as they clearly had no impact whatsoever on real policing!

It may have a Sony sensor, but I suspect Pentax use completely different processing and possibly even a different filter in front of it. Much the same as Saab being handed a pile of GM bits and building something which is a much better car than anything else using them!

I know my friend's A100 can't match my K-m if you ask both to produce JPGs in-camera, and they most likely share a sensor.

Unless the A 28-80mm is the SMC version I wouldn't bother with it. I keep seeing them listed BIN for silly money which they really aren't worth - about the same prices as the A 35-70mm which is a much better lens!

I think it comes down to this:

We all like Pentax and want them to succeed, but we get annoyed when they do silly things in marketing or release products that could be so much better.

If it's a main dealer it'll be fine, they know what to do. Problems come if you visit the likes of ATS who don't necessarily understand Freelanders.

Wow - one of these came up on ebay for about £60 a couple of months ago. Funnily enough it didn't hang around for long!

I would argue with their comparative reviews of the K and M 28/3.5. Admittedly my testing probably wasn't scientific enough (same camera settings, same composition, only changed aperture and lenses) but I found there to be a noticeable difference between the K and M at f3.5 (the K was much sharper). By f8 they're level, but I've taken shots with the K at f3.5 which were as good as anything from a modern lens.

Interesting to see them comparing the SMC Takumar version of the lens with the K, as I'd always thought the K series were simply SMC Taks with K mounts. Apparently there was some improvement to the design as well as changing the mount!

I don't really see why the plastic mount and body on the new DA 35/2.4 matters. Part of the appeal of primes for me is that they're smaller and lighter, using plastic helps with both. I don't think it needs a metal mount as due to the incredibly light weight of the lens it puts very little stress on the mount.