Thanks. Tried the hack which works. Not sure if focus is better as it's not far out so will probably take a time to tell. Looks maybe better with test shots though. Great facilty to have all the same.

I would like to see a proper shutter release socket on the K-x/K-r and the IR receiver mounted in such a way it can be triggered from front or back of the camera. Also mirror lock up on these cameras.
Dave
P.S - drop proof would be nice - see my topic above!!!

After a couple of previous lucky escapes in the last two years I've finally done some damage. Apart from the hot-shoe breaking (the flash was on it at the time but thankfully is ok) I think there might be some autofocus issues. It seems slightly out, but it could be the lens not the camera. (55-300mm DAL). Is there any way of resetting or adjusting the focus? Also - does the accidental damage section of my house insurance usually cover this sort of thing?

I'm at the same stage. Generally the best pics take a lot of time and unless the person is a personal friend they will be reluctant to divulge much information in case someone spreads it around and disturbs the birds or the setting. They of course also want the kudos of their exclusive pics.
This is what we all aspire to.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/martyarty/5759108421/in/photostream
Not Pentax but so good.
In the end though it is the welfare of the birds that has to be the first priority.

I've just seen one of these advertised and I wasn't aware this was possible. Hitherto my bargain searching has been limited to Tamron Adaptall and Takumar lenses, mainly. Are there any possibilities in pursuing this route with legacy Nikon lenses which I know nothing about. Especially in terms of:-
1. Image quality
2. Availabilty of longer lenses
3. Cheap!

I'm not concerned about having to use manual focus, exposure.

Really interesting and thank you. It is still very difficult decision and several on here including me have asked very similar questions. I do think that in most instances the most expensive option gives the best results (not surprisingly!). For what it's worth I have had some fabulous results with my 55-300mm DAL but it can be horrendously slow and embarrassingly noisy to focus as it hunts up and down. (Add that to the K-x shutter and focus bleep and you could get thrown out the hide!) This applies to low contrast as well as low light conditions. I use the Tamron mirror in bright light and have had some excellent results for £100 but you can't really just walk around and point and shoot! I think I would prefer the 300mm DA* plus TC but you are up to a grand then so will probably go for the bargain priced 150-500 Sigma which seems to be best value. For special trips lasting three days or more I think I will hire the DA*300 from SRS !
Dave
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcweather/
Birds mostly with 55-300 DAL
K-x, DAL 55-300mm,various Adaptall lenses, TeleTakumar 200mm (a fantastic little £25 lens!), Raynox 150 plus various other bits and pieces.

I do shoot in DNG raw for my wildlife shots. I think it's more of a safety net in case you get it wrong giving more flexible correction. On the other hand every shot in raw seems to need some attention which can be tedious.

True but how would you do that if light is low. You are on maximum aperture and minimum useable shutter speed. If you up the EV you will just decrease shutter speed.

I nearly always shoot in raw. I understand what you are saying. If light is short then under exposing and pulling it back in post processing will then bring up more noise. probably the case in my examples because when shooting wildlife I need to keep the shutter speed above a minimum to avoid focus issues and so sometimes have to underexpose by a stop or two. The age old problem that there really is no solution to although on balance I may as well up the ISo to get the shutter speed because in the end the noise may be less than underexposing and adjusting post processing?
Thanks,
Dave

It is set to ISO>800, low setting. But I assume testing is done with noise reduction off as it would just be measuring how effective the different cameras noise reduction algorithms were?
Incidentally that setting is a bit ambiguous. Does noise reduction kick in AT ISO 800 or when it is above that. Odd wording on themenu really.
Dave