Keep checking the adverts from forum members on here, several bodies for sale at the moment.

Lovely picture, really special.

Echo most of the above, the tuft could be good if it was in the picture. I think there are too many elements trying to compete for star billing!
Is it HDR by any chance?

All the old K mount lenses, both manual and auto focus, will work but there are some restrictions with the MF lenses.

You can even use the old M42 mount lenses with an adaptor.

When I bought my k10, I just bought the body and used my old manual focus lenses to start with. Within the week I had started to add to my collection though.

Thanks for the help.
Looks like I need keep my eyes out for a takumar or a fur hatted man with a big suitcase!

Thanks for the help.
I think I am really looking for a prime lens.
Does anybody have experience of some of the older MF lenses, especially regarding sharpness at larger apertures.

I have the sigma 70-300 but I find it's not too briliant at the longer end, especially when the light is less than ideal.

I was thinking more of some of the older pentax or other manufacturers prime lenses. Maybe the Takumars or eastern european offerings. Manual focus is ok and I have an m42 adaptor for my k10. Any suggestions?

I would like to get a 300/400mm lens, particularly for wildlife.
The easy answer is a nice new DA300 but there are a few hundred reasons why that can't happen this side of a lottery jackpot!
Whilst I realise that quality often goes with price, sometimes there are little jems around in the second hand market that may do the job for less.

So the question is, what less expensive lenses over 300mm have people used that still gave good image quality even though they didn't cost a lot?

Definitely the tree for me too. Not so keen on the mixed lighting on some of the others.

If you do decide to go for the Bigma, will you be selling the 170-500?