Neither do I.

However, if I am still alive in 11 years time and the K mount is too then I guarantee that I will still be using several of my K series lenses 50 years after their birth. And they will last many years after that and many years after me.

If your forte is as I think it is, landscape, then I don't see a reason to limit your choice to A or later lenses. Green button stop down metering is fine and the histogram is your friend, so I would look further back in time. I would recommend the M50/1.7 and M28/3.5. I would very highly recommend the K28/3.5, K35/3.5 and K55/1.8. For a predominantly landscape lens then the K28/3.5 would be my pick.

It is optically identical so hardly a surprise that it takes images as well as a metal mount version.

Nice shots, it is certainly a lens that punches well above its weight at the sweet spot. But tell me how the plastic mount is faring in 50 years time.

True, but you could view it as an alternative to a wide angle prime. Plus I can envisage many situations where it is preferable to using a K5. I'm going to London next week. I usually lug around the K5 and a tripod. The prospect of a GR in the pocket and a gorillapod (or possibly a walking stick monopod with feet is mighty tempting and opens up creative possibilities. From what I have seen it beats the K5 for cityscapes. If I'm going specifically on a landscape shoot then I'll take all the gear, but if am just out and about then the GR in the pocket will mean that I will miss nothing if a great opportunity arises and I think that's worth a premium.

The downsides for me, apart from possibly the focal length, is that it can't be operated I don't think by an IR remote and that the low light AF could be better.

I'm fully aware of that, a few other members/ex-members of this forum have been using it as a second body/primary body. The quality is very good but the I think the GR would suit me better in every other way. I'm not wedded to only ever buying Ricoh I just think that there will be some developments soon that make it the right option. The GR is so good that is worth waiting a while to see what will happen - I want to get something that I now I will be happy using for five years. It is the same with full frame for me. I've always been prepared to give Ricoh a reasonable time to deliver products and this year is now right to do that. I think they will.

The creative aspect is right up here, very good action, very well framed, very good viewpoints.

Focus is clearly off in the last but I'm wondering whether some of the softness in others could be down to a not quite fast enough shutter speed. In the header shot for instance the boots are sharp and in focus whereas the head is a little blurred and that would be consistent with motion blur on the faster moving parts of the scene.

I've been pondering the same thing for a while now. I want a go everywhere, always prepared, camera that is capable of high quality results. Although high quality is unnecessary for the majority of situations I want that option should I happen across a rare opportunity. There will always be some compromise, quality, price, compactness, range of focal length. For the potential benefits the compromise to which I'm most likely to succumb is price.

I'd prefer it to be a Ricoh Imaging product. I'm not sure that the ideal camera exists yet for me from any marque, although it's getting close now.

I did look at the MX-1. I thought it very good for what it was but I thought it was compromised by slow RAW write speeds. Image quality, whilst very good for the small sensor, and for the price, is ultimately quite a way short of my requirements.

I have been very impressed indeed with the GR. Almost everything is right. I can live with a fixed focal length but I would want that to be a 35mm equivalent. I do think we may see some variants to build on to the success of the GR. Maybe a choice of focal lengths or even a limited zoom. So I shall try and hang on a little longer. I think Ricoh might have some announcements next month that will give a good indication of where products are heading.

Oh I see, better late than never.

There's a new macro?

I wouldn't. There is an obvious risk to the camera but it is just an uncomfortable thing to lug around. It needs to go in a backpack, which is a pain on the chairlifts. A compact is much more convenient, plus you can use it much more easily whilst skiing.