This is probably a daft question, hence asking here rather than in a new thread!

Do dedicated macro lenses still focus to infinity (i.e. can you use them as a normal lens too)? I realise that they are usually more bulky and slower than the normal lens of the same focal length, but I'm just wondering.

What amazes me is that during that era Pentax sold all of their cameras with a stunning 50mm lens attached. Yes they made faster versions but if you bought your ME Super with the 50mm f1.7 then you had one of the finest photographic tools ever made, enabling you to match any photographer once you developed the skill to use it. Even now that lens will stand comparison to any 50mm prime. I should know, I've got three of them (two Ms and an A)!

I'm just amazed that the marketing department let them get away with it, as it must have been terrible if you think in the modern terms of selling the widget and then making more money from selling bits to improve it!

The Cokin A filters don't seem to be worth much these days, presumably as they're no use for wide angles and they're too small for the new lenses with giant front elements.

Prices for film bodies seem to be climbing again - I know I managed to bag a mint MZ-50 with 35-80mm last year for £10 but I'd try asking £20 for the MZ-10 body and seeing where it goes. The MZ-10 was one of the more upmarket double-digit MZ bodies IIRC?

I know you'd get £50 for the 50mm f1.4, as I saw one listed on ebay Buy it Now for £55 a couple of weeks ago and it went within days - I unfortunately thought about it for a bit too long rather than pouncing!

That's not especially fair IMO - vinyl often sounds better, unless a piece has been specifically remastered for CD. Older recordings were usually made with the engineer thinking how it would sound on vinyl, so a straight copy to CD doesn't work so well. I know I have "Tubular Bells" on vinyl and CD, and the vinyl sounds much more detailed - you can hear little bits and pieces that aren't on the CD.

I also have a wind-up pocket watch that, when tested, kept perfect time compared to a radio controlled quartz clock for about three weeks (after which I got bored with comparing them). The best part? It was a £6 ebay special from Hong Kong that I bought because it looked good. I didn't expect it to be that accurate!

I dunno, you could probably photoshop the offender out and be left with some good shots of the Oxford court buildings!

Didn't Pentax and Zeiss intend this to happen when they invented the K mount in the 1970s? Sure I read that somewhere?

Although I've always been surprised by how few Zeiss K mount lenses I see for sale - there was a 28mm prime last month but I didn't bother as I can't see it being better than the Pentax-M 28mm f3.5!

I usually suggest people try slide film if they have an old 35mm camera about. Slide makes life much simpler as it's process paid (does anyone make process paid 35mm print film?)

I shoot both, and I've found that buying a DSLR has got me back into film as well. Thing is, with digital you can see the results immediately, so I think it's a much better learning tool (as opposed to film where I tend to forget what settings I used by the time I finish the roll).

I do find that I have very different approaches with the two. I'm far more inclined to try odd compositions or techniques on digital and will also fire away knowing that I can simply delete any results that I don't like. On film, I stick to things that I know will work and don't take as many shots. A roll of film lasts me for a month or two as I simply don't get through it that fast.

I'll admit to using older primes in Av mode (so shooting wide open), at longer distances it often doesn't make much difference. I recently photographed a stage show from the back of the hall with the 120mm and at f2.8 and 1600 ISO it was somewhat amazing - very sharp results even when cropped.

Don't get me wrong, if all the numbers ever come up I'll be ordering a full set of DA and FA Limiteds (and *s) along with a KX and K7, but the cream of my K and M primes would still be used. They just offer amazing performance for the money.

This chap did a great job of cleaning fungus from a 200mm f4 for me, charged around £40. Might be worth sending an email to see if he's able to sort your lens out?