That there is the very reason why I would like a ff option, so that lenses have a dual purpose. The body costs more but you can save on lenses as each one that is compatible has two focal lengths.

It seems to me that although small in number, those that have moved to Nikon (it always seems to be Nikon) are amongst the finest of Pentax photographers. In fact I struggle now to think of great photographers that remain. Bill Gekas and one or two I have noted from 500pix. Let's hope the K Ropnutoj really is as good as that statement would suggest. The apparently firm commitments to full frame have become we are still thinking about it in the above garbled Russian. Pentax is at a fork in the road, will it remain a brand for amateurs or is it serious about the greater ambitions it has stated, we shall see soon enough.

So it looks like the next offering won't be named the K3 after all, looking forward to the K Ropnutoj instead. Looks like it will take almost DA lenses, I suppose that means a new range of CA lenses.

That's what I said. I can't imagine any difficulty selling on either. Buy well and you might even make a few bob.

This is a once in a lifetime trip to a highly photogenic location and I would maximise my opportunities for wonderful photography.

I too think the 18-135 might be a little short. I have no experience of it but some of the images posted from it put me off completely. For landscapes I think IQ looks rather poor at the wide end where it would most likely be used. I wouldn't go for the kit lenses.

I would take a 60-250. I haven't got one but the range and WR seems perfect. The Sigma 100-300 would be an alternative, not rated as WR but it is internal zooming so I'd risk it with a plastic bag wrapped around when necessary. I would look to purchase the lens secondhand and sell it on afterwards.

That makes things bulky so instead of a second zoom I would look to a prime (or two) for the landscape. But changing lenses could be a pain and there is the distinct possibility of a wildlife and a wonderful landscape opportunity at the same time. So I think actually I would take a Ricoh GR or a FujiX100 as an always on me high quality camera and one that could also be used in conjunction with the DSLR. Both I think would be great landscape options and I'd go for a filter adapter and a couple of grads too. I would probably go for the GR and it's extra pocketability and have a 30 or 35mm prime in the DSLR bag. Again buying and selling used would be a low cost option.

I like the composition on the last but I'm not so keen on the fuzzy blobs on the last or the highlights.

The cranes is the standout for me.

It has the advantage of taking filters, but the 14-24 does look something else. I wonder if you can get a Pentax-Pentax adaptor for it.

It has certainly stimulated my interest in the Pentax 14-24mm F2.8G AF-S ED

I enjoyed viewing the lovely image in the colour balance in the landscape article displayed on the front page. Clicking on the link in the article lead me to the full portfolio containing some exquisite landscape work. It is highly recommended viewing. The image quality is stellar, I particularly liked the super clean skies in the night shots and fine detail on show throughout. It is just the kind of landscape work that I aspire to achieve some day(actually just dream about more likely). So naturally the equipment used is of interest. Seems that we won't be able to talk about that bit though.

For street roaming then the compact DA15 will come into its own. For architecture then I think the Pentax12-24. For landscape then my choice would be the 12-24 too, it is just such a useful range. I wouldn't have just the 15, I would want something around 24 too.

The DA12-28 should be out soon, I would hang back for a while