Yep, if you set it to Av it will meter and shoot with the lens held at the largest aperture.

If you set it to M, be aware that some trial and error may be needed to get the exposure right. I find that the camera's idea of the right shutter speed can be slightly off (and I know it's not a fault as most others have it too).

When you're focussing manually look for a little green hexagon in the viewfinder, this confirms that you're in focus.

If you decide that you like the lens, have a look for the Pentax-A 50mm f1.7. It's the same lens but with the A position on the aperture ring, so it'll work with all the modes on your camera apart from auto focus.

A photographer I know once had the following conversation:

Old bore approaches at show, talks for ages, won't shut up. Eventually asks "what sort of photography do you do"

She responds "Pornographic"

Cue red-faced bore departing quickly while spluttering "oh...well...oh"!

(she actually shoots landscapes, weddings and clothed portraits)

Oh, don't worry, I do! It was the first manual prime I bought, at the price I reckoned it was worth a try. I did end up spending another £8 for an original lens cap but I still think it was worth the money. It makes pretty much all modern lenses feel cheap and flimsy, and the proportions look perfect on a DSLR.

There is a lens that was offered in both the K and M series, the 80-200mm f4.5. Pentax simply changed the lettering on the barrel when K series production stopped, although they later went on to redesign the lens completely. I have a version 1 M series version of this lens and it's a very nice piece of glassware. One of those lenses that you feel the urge to get out and have a play with as it's such a pleasure to handle. Mine was a £20 impulse buy that turned out to be optically and mechanically perfect with only some paint wear to show for its years.

Easy way to tell it apart from the version 2 - the earlier lens has a chrome ring where the grip meets the section of the barrel that has the lettering on, the version 2 has no chrome on it.

Good to hear the gear has returned, the car problem may not be too serious either depending on how recent it is. I know it always used to be the case that diesels were less fussy about being fed petrol than petrols are about being fed diesel, if that makes sense.

Mind you, I fed my Land Rover vegetable oil a couple of years ago and it didn't seem to mind!

It is odd though. Exposure is spot on if I set the camera to Av and ignore the aperture control on the lens, this goes for all pre-A series.

My K 55mm f1.8 must have been the bargain of the year then - £8.50 on ebay, nothing whatsoever wrong with it apart from a small amount of dust!

All that Uzbekistan is proving here is that they have a backward government that fails to understand how tourism works. Most states trade enthusiastically on their unspoiled countryside, realising that photos of traditionally-dressed people do wonders for bringing in visitors. Would they rather she'd taken photos of burger bars and clone shops in a city? Those would do nothing for tourism as they'd look exactly the same as your local shopping centre.

I could take photos in parts of Britain that don't include "modern" things, in fact the structures in many of my photos are around a hundred years old. I do this because to be quite honest modern architecture leaves me cold. Is this giving a poor image? I doubt it, friends from the other side of the world have seen the photos and now want to visit Britain!

I can't help but suspect that something is happening under the table here. Does the photographer have a history of protesting against their government or as a human rights activist? It sounds exactly like the sort of made-up charge a dictatorship would use to crush opposition to me.

Take a look at the older manual-focus A series lenses, if you find that your zooms aren't fast enough. The Pentax-A 50mm f1.7 is a superb lens and will work with all modes on your DSLR. It'll cost a good deal less than the FA 50mm and is a lot more compact than a zoom.

I'd love an F/FA 50mm or a DA 40mm but simply don't have the money!

I also suspect that M42 lenses go for higher prices due to the fact that adapters exist to use them on pretty much every DSLR out there!

Still looking for an SMC Tak 55mm f1.8 to go with my ES II, but not particularly hard as I object to paying £30+ for a lens to use on a camera I only paid £10 for...

Talking of K series, here's a shot I took today with my 55mm while attempting to master manual mode. I tend to find that my K-m's metering can be a bit odd in manual with pre-A series lenses, even with stop down metering it took a bit of trial and error to get this shot. The camera, left to its own devices, seemed to underexpose considerably but functions perfectly in Av mode. Obviously for this shot I wanted the greater depth of field at f22, so had to fiddle about a bit.

[IMG]http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x21/Kingofthemountains/EMU/IMGP1261.jpg[/IMG]

It's a mostly-finished OO scale model of a 1960s EMU, another three coaches are in various stages of completion.

I was thinking along similar lines - a wiki page with the concrete facts (that cannot be argued with - for example, an f2 lens is slower than an f1.7) then a link to a thread debating the relative merits of different lenses/bodies/whatever, for example the various 28-80mm (ish, also include 28-70, 35-70, 35-80 and 28-90).

Sample images could also be posted showing the best results that can be achieved with the gear being covered in the article.

I have a single K series (55mm f1.8 ), I like it and keep an eye out for others. However, I wouldn't say it's any better or worse than the M series. It's slightly slower than the M 50mm f1.7 which is also smaller and lighter, but I still see them priced at daft levels. I paid £8.50 for mine, it's in excellent condition aside from a few dust particles inside. I can't believe that the £80 one I saw earlier is in better condition!

I think it must come down to the rarity value. There will be millions of M 50mm lenses out there as it was a kit lens for most Pentax SLRs, however the K 55mm was only sold for a few years and presumably only on the KX/KM/K2.

What I cannot fathom is the fact that multiple sources say the M 40mm is not rare, yet I have never seen one for under £50. I wouldn't mind one as I have an MX that would suit it perfectly, but I'm not paying the best part of £100 for an indifferent lens with the same aperture as the cheapest of the 50mm lenses (which is probably better in optical terms).