It just sounds as though the infinity focus setting is out - Pentax's repair bods should be able to fix that in an hour assuming it's anything like the FA 80-200mm I had to reset infinity on after cleaning fungus.

I would be more inclined to ask for a replacement and check it thoroughly before taking it away though. Not unreasonable to expect an expensive item to work perfectly from the box!

My advice would be to measure the lens then look on the Lowepro website to see which case you need. Their prices are very reasonable, especially considering the build quality of the cases. They are very well made indeed and protect lenses superbly - I consider them better than the old Pentax hard cases as they're made from breathable materials, so the lens doesn't end up in an atmosphere of trapped damp.

They also come with a silica gel bag, which seems to keep fungus away if tucked into the filter pocket in the lid of the case.

It's probably due to different business models. SRS view their stock as an investment which will sell eventually and isn't damaging them to keep around. PC World meanwhile see stock which has sat around for ages as something in dire need of selling and will drop their prices to little above trade in order to do so.

It's worth keeping an eye on Amazon too - they occasionally drop prices dramatically on some items.

They're missing out....[/quote]I agree, 127.5mm FOV is odd. Maybe you could get an adapter for the D3 and then it will work as designed?

Best regards[/quote]I've only got the Samyang 85mm (not quite in FA* territory but not a million miles away either!) and find it very useful. Remember that 135mm used to be the standard telephoto prime lens, and the field of view isn't far off that. It's very good for stage shows/gigs and weirdly motorsport too, as you often get low light levels in forest rally stages. It has more or less replaced the 120mm f2.8 I used to use when in need of a fast telephoto, although I've no intention of selling that as it's a very nice, rare lens.

I've no experience of the usual prices for these but would wonder if he simply pressed "0" once too many times?

Well if someone buys it...

I've just been negotiating the minefield which is used medium format gear. After avoiding listings such as "used for a photography degree" (I remember what student housing was like!) and "selling on behalf of my retired wedding photographer Father" (who most likely used it hard every weekend) I ended up buying a basic kit for about the same money, which was described as "perfect" and from a dealer.

Could I have paid less? Definitely. But I hope I've picked an example with plenty of life left rather than an old pro's worn out trade-in!

My Dad bought the 150-500mm with a tax refund (they'd been charging him for a company car after the lease had finished and he'd bought the car himself) and is very happy with it, although I've had more use from it than he has so far!

Only criticism is that it struggles to find focus on my K-m but at f6.3 in a Welsh February I'm not entirely surprised. A tripod is pretty much essential and manual focus is therefore not difficult. Overall, a very nice piece of kit when you have the right conditions.

Are those chaps sure they have enough cameras each? I feel daft with a digital body in hand and a film one stuffed in a pocket, let alone as many as they have!

The genuine ones are definitely better made - the bayonet fitting is quite a complicated bit of machining and not all the 3rd party copies manage it terribly well.

If you don't fancy shelling out £30-£60 for genuine then make sure the 3rd party one you buy looks as close as possible to the real thing. There are some about with a flange which place the lens too far away from the camera, so you lose infinity focus. The proper design fits flush with the K mount when installed.

Also beware flaking chrome and the retaining clip - on some cheapies this can be prone to working loose and jamming the adapter in place. Not so bad with a K1000 as you can just unscrew the lens mount after removing the lens, but if you have ambitions to use it on a DSLR then this can cause some distress!

I can see how UV light would kill fungus, but I can't see how it would make it disappear? The fungus itself would surely be left as a dead husk?