An enjoyable documentary of something that many locals probably don't know much about, it makes interesting reading and viewing.

Regards
David

Agree with Dr. O, this will cure it completely. Pentax supply a cover for the eyepiece, alternatively you can easily make one by cutting out some cardboard in the correct shape (cereal box card will do) and covering with black electrical tape. It will slide under the rubber around the viewfinder and this will hold it in place.

Regards
David

Great set of images Drew, living in Sheffield I should know this place, but I've never been there!

Cheers
David

To answer the original question 'do I have a rubbish K-3', I very much doubt it, but it is possible. Like any complex machine there are manufacturing tolerances which can have a significant effect on the final IQ, particularly when it comes to accurate focussing. As has been said earlier in this thread, we would need to see some sample shots.

There is no doubting the quality of the K-3, it's a superb image making machine, as was the K-5iis, K-5ii and K-5 before it. However, I've come across at least 3 or 4 examples of K-5's just within my limited circle of photography friends that have had serious focussing issues, whereas other examples of the same model have been flawless. To identify if there's a problem with the camera, it would need to be checked out by a qualified engineer, or perhaps better still compared directly with another K-3 that is known to be operating correctly. Images of the same subjects, with the same settings applied, same lenses, on a tripod are the best way to compare, particularly for suspected AF issues. I'm not suggesting your camera has an AF issue, but as you don't give specific details of what the problems are with your shots, I'm offering one possible cause.

Regards
David

I probably wouldn't buy any new lenses but I'd be mighty interested to see the results from my M28mm F3.5, I suspect this would be a match made in heaven.

Regards
David

I have a beautiful Tamron 300mm F 5.6 Adapt-a-matic in mint condition (Model 670AU), this would work well with a TC, but focussing manually would be a challenge. Also, to perform at a decent level it needs to be stopped down to F8, which would make it even more of a challenge. It is capable of producing images that I think are superior to the 55-300, but some may disagree. The images have a different sort of quality, not bitingly sharp, but very pleasing to look at with lovely warm colours and great bokeh. I paid £20 for it, so I can live with its shortcomings.

I use it with a K-mount adaptor permanently fitted, but clearly it doesn't have the advantages of a proper K mount and is manual only.

I'm not suggesting it's a viable alternative to a decent 400mm lens, but it's an interesting lens to use and one I enjoy owning.

Regards
David

Beautiful image Neil, you couldn't have captured this any better.

Regards
David

I would never use this lens with a filter, I suspect this to be the primary cause of the problem. I've never seen any flaring with my 50-135.

Regards
David

The K-5iis is poor with a R72 filter. Much better results can be had with an older body, my K-x worked well with the R72.

Regards
David

What a great blog Jonathan. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and agree with your thoughts on the K-3, it really is a superb camera. It does need to be treated with care though, the additional resolution does not like even the tiniest bit of camera shake, so it's vital to have good camera skills to get the best from it.

I've kept my K-5iis as I can't bear to part with it. It's not too far behind the K-3 in image quality and is still a magnificent camera which get used on a regular basis.

Regards
David