I hope they are, as I've got a small stock of the stuff and I sent a roll off a couple of weeks ago!

I have done. It was very good at cropping out unwanted foreground stuff like untidy fences or walls to capture a sweeping landscape.

I now use a 28mm prime for the same purpose - it's sharp enough that I can crop images to remove unwanted objects and the results are still perfectly acceptable. It also works very well with the "Hugin" panorama creator software that I use.

The MX is a superb answer to everything, especially with either a 50mm or the M 35-70mm zoom on the front as mine now carries. It even makes old pros who've always had Nikon and regard a £500 lens as cheap nod appreciatively.

I cannot fathom the Sony user mindset at all. I spent about 20mins this morning looking up reviews of the Samyang lenses via Google and pretty much everyone else likes them. The 500mm mirror lens seems to be a case of "not a bad performer, but it suffers from the usual mirror lens problems" but the 85mm appears pretty much universally popular. That said, I read that it loses sharpness when stopped down - has anyone noticed this?

I find brick walls, woodwork, and oddly enough Lego are good test subjects for lenses. You can do wonderful macro tests with a few Lego spacemen and a suitable board, as they're rather blocky you soon tell whether the lens is sharp or not!

I suspect it's down to personal technique, Photojournalists are very aware of their rights, carry ID, and will do a lot of PR damage to the Police if hassled so as a result they'll stand up for themselves more, knowing that they can escalate the situation to a front-page story about Police interfering in the legitimate activities of the news media if they feel the need to.

A law-abiding member of the public will usually obey Police instructions rather than challenging them. The problem comes when the instructions are nonsensical and seem intended to keep the public under control rather than upholding the law.

Let us know how it goes. I've been warned off them now (despite the fact that every review I've seen apart from Sony user ones seems to love the Samyang range) and I would love to see some decent photos to prove otherwise.

I'm coming to the conclusion that Sony must rig their cameras so they won't work well with anything apart from late Minolta or their most expensive new glass, as they don't seem to like anything else!

I've used my M 40mm on digital before now, it's compact but the field of view is a bit too narrow for a walkabout lens. 28mm is much more useful on APS-C.

I just used a pair of flat-jawed plastic tweezers, they grabbed the little tab well enough and didn't do any damage.

Personally I'd hope that more and more people will boycott events with stipulations like this. "One that looks professional"? So suddenly their door gorillas are photography experts?

I've heard of some sporting events in the USA where you weren't allowed to take a lens above a certain focal length in, presumably to ensure that the only usable photos were those taken by the pros who'd paid far more for pitch-side seats and permits.

I'm wondering if this is something along the lines of Pentax being the only manufacturer to develop their lens mount, rather than making a new one?

The modern auto focus mount uses the same contacts as the original "A" mount, just with a screw drive added. Did Nikon et al do their version of the "A" and then switch to an AF mount by simply adding a screw drive/contacts for their version of SDM/whatever they use?

As a result it's easy for 3rd party manufacturers to make their Pentax-mount lenses as KA, which works on every K mount camera either in A mode or with the aperture ring unlocked.

I have seldom spent over £50 for any lens, but here goes:

The Good:

Any of the original SMC Pentax lenses (known here as the K series). Not commonly found for under £50 but it does happen, I paid £8 for the 55mm f1.8 which has to be the bargain of the century - it's apparently almost as good as the new DA 55mm which costs about £540 more!

Any Pentax-M lens you can lay hands on. Generally the faster the better, although the 28mm f3.5 is better than the f2.8 IMO. I have to disagree strongly about the 40-80mm zoom, I have one and it's great. The macro feature is very useful and I've taken very sharp photos with it on digital. Also worth looking at the M 35-70mm - faster than its successors and does appear cheaply on occasion if you like "cosmetically scruffy, optically perfect" lenses as I do. The 35-70mm is probably the better lens but if you see the 40-80mm cheap then go for it.

Any Pentax-A lens with SMC coating, especially the primes. I have the 50mm f1.7 and 200mm f4 from this range which I would only replace with AF versions of both - the optics are perfect.

Pentax-F 35-70mm (well worth owning as a compact walkabout lens, it's a solid performer with a surprisingly useful zoom range). I now seem to flip between this and my M 28mm f3.5 for walkabouts depending on whether I want AE and AF or if I'm not too bothered. That's probably the only SMC Pentax-F lens you'll see for under £50 though!

The Power Zoom 28-80mm is a surprisingly handy performer despite the poor reviews, I bought one with a view to acquiring a cheap Z1 and playing with the Power Zoom tricks but it's actually very usable as a plain AF zoom on my K-m.

The Bad:

Pentax-F 35-80mm - do not buy this lens, you can do far better for the money. I found it lifeless and dull. In its favour it's small and light, but you won't spend much more for the F 35-70mm which is a much better lens.

Pentax-F 28-80mm (the non-SMC one, also sold as a Takumar-F). Feels well made but lacks vibrancy due to the different coating. Again, keep watching and you'll do better for the same money, as with the Power Zoom 28-80mm. The same goes for the Pentax-A 28-80mm (again non-SMC, again also sold as a Takumar).