Looks like the battery is unable to deliver the extra juice required for the live view. When you turn it off and on again the voltage rises until the drain gets too much.

Is it happening with more than one battery?
If it is only happening with the one, it is the battery. If it happens with more than one, it could be the camera. Check the battery terminals are clean, as well.

This is all very interesting.
I realize the decrease in depth of field would be an advantage. Improved SR and auto focus will help, probably without me realizing it most of the time. The flip screen would be good. All round update on my K5 would probably be worth thinking about.

Lack of on board flash might be missed sometimes, although I never missed it with my Super A. Larger file size would a mixed blessing, computer power, storage space and time to fiddle with the images will all cost more. GPS, I can't really see the point. Size and weight are a problem for quite a bit of what I do, I have been looking at the KS-2 as a possible light weight option. There is always the nagging feeling though, that I'd be missing out on something!

I guess I won't really need to think about it for a while as I'm never in a hurry for the latest, preferring to see how others find it first and maybe get a few price reductions in.

As the K1 is now nearly a reality, what advantages will the K1 have over the K3ii and what disadvantages will the K1 have?
I'm particularly interested in the taking of the image and the end results, rather than the mechanics and technicalities.

SuperA always worked for me.
As Andrew said, half a stop under expose seemed to work for me.

Personally, I like longer lenses for landscape!
Different people tend to like different focal lengths for landscape. Something to do with the way the individual sees the world. Some like wide views, some like the compressed view the longer lens gives. Most of us will use both extremes and in between.

The 16-45 f4 would be a good choice. Good range, constant f4, close focus and a good quality lens. All in all a really good allrounder. Prices of these have tumbled recently but don't be fooled, this lens is very good

The M28mm 3.5 is wonderful. Gives you a near to 'normal' prime on APSc.

An M or A 50mm gives you a nice short telephoto for both landscape and every other use. Cheap to buy, even the larger aperture versions are not very expensive but all are very good lenses. Also gives you a low light lens for general use.

M135 3.5 is a great lens and can be picked up for around £30-35. A compact but great lens you can only love.

When you say a three lens kit it suggests you need to cover a wide range from 8/10mm to 300 or more.

It is tempting to suggest zoom lenses, to cover a wide range of focal lengths but do you really need to have every focal length? Is it really necessary to have 50, 52, 54, 57, 65, and 70mm focal lengths available. A short walk can do wonders for composition.
If you only chose zooms, you will miss out on some wonderful macro pictures, for instance. Quality zooms are usually big/heavy, and not easy to carry up a mountain but a small prime of good quality is much lighter and will do a really good job.

The reality is that your choice really depends on what sort of subjects you like in your photography and where you take the pictures.
How heavy/light the kit can be, does it need to be WR, large aperture, SDM? Cost and many other things may influence your choices but in the end only you can decide which three lenses will be best for you.
Of course, it goes without saying that until you have tried out a few different three lens kits you won't know your optimum kit. Even if you get others advice first, you have to have an excuse to try out another lens and it will always improve your results!

If there was a three lens kit that suited everyone Pentax would not produce all the lenses they do, Sigma/Tamron and all the others would be making something else.

I currently have a k5 & k10. Have resisted replacing the k5 so far but with the improvement's in the newer cameras it won't be long!
I must admit that I'm attracted to the ks-2 for it's lighter weight, for days in the mountains. Seems to offer a lot for the price.

The great thing about the 18-135 is its size and lack of weight. You can add it's range, weather resistance and it's silent operation. It is my lens of choice for mountain treks. I now have the 16-85 but than is quite a bit heavier and so the 18-135 still gets lots of use.

It seems to work very well as a landscape lens, although it does like a bit of light.

I have quite a few pictures in my gallery if you want to see why I'm a fan!

And the rain stops/ cloud clears.

Thanks for the heads up though. it is supposed to clear later tonight.

I wouldn't dismiss the da50-200 out of hand but you should be able to find one with hood and without chips for only slightly more.
It is a very light, compact lens, practically pocket size. With a bit of light it will turn out reasonable results. There has been a thread on PU recently, discussing its strengths and weaknesses.