Except that the macro will focus much closer. The DA35macro I think would be a more versatile choice, I've thought about that lens quite often but have resisted. I'm sure I would enjoy it, I used to visit Nyman's gardens in Sussex regularly and I enjoy seeing Mattmatic's images from there. There are very few great gardens in France and they tend towards the formal which I don't like. The upside of that is that I have paid much more attention to wildflowers aka weeds and due to the close scrutiny that photography encourages I now find them much more interesting than cultivars.

I find the 43 a little short for these scenes. It would be interesting to see results from the (I presume) FA50/1.4 - it is a lens that I just didn't get on with, others rate it Pentax' finest. I had a good play around earlier this year to try and decide on my preferred flower lens and my conclusion was I need two. I always seem to come back to the K55 for a dreamy feel and the Tamron SP90macro, which has 1:2 magnification that I find ideal and superb colour. The 77 would be great but doesn't have a close enough focus to be the lens of choice. I always have an old, inexpensive prime in the bag to be used in the rain.

I think these are very competent images, as one would expect, but I think these show the limitations of those wide range zoom lenses, which in situations like this tend firmly towards the documentary. I think the fuchsia shot in particular could have been rather interesting with a much shallower depth of field. I appreciate your aversion to old, manual lenses but I think a lens such as the K55/1.8 would have been ideal here in producing something that stands out from the crowd.

Yawn yawn yawn. I hope a new camera is released soon just to end these endless, pointless discussions about K5II/s vs K5. These shots are clearly more than fit for purpose, equipment would make sodall difference.

It is very weird, a gothic futuristic mashup. 19th century meets 23rd century. The extreme smoothing leaves a very ambiguous feel, is the subject real or not? And those contradictions are I think the strengths of this image and the reason I keep popping back for another look.

Not what I was expecting from the title. I like the first shot best and in stark mono.

Very nice. I think the composition is well balanced and the subtle patterns on the foreground sand essential. They encourage the eye to explore the scene and add depth and expansiveness. I would leave it as is.

TF, I like that. Thanks for all the comments. The gloomy conditions were a blessing, up to the point where it got really gloomy. Had I had my batteries ready earlier I would have done better. The spots of rain add to some portraits but detract from others (not shown here). I am a flash/studio numpty so I only do natural light portraits and I always avoid bright conditions. The small sizes of this forum disguise some of the inadequacies, the first two shots are up two standard the last two definitely not. The choices of background were deliberate and all mediaeval originals. These days I almost think of myself as a photographer of backgrounds with a subject in the way, I think it's that important. @Micheal, I took all their email adresses and I hope to be able to do some work with them in future if they like the results. It's the first time I have really just grabbed strangers and posed them, all the other photographers there just got whatever they could without any interaction. But the reaction I got was very rewarding and it is definitely something I'll be doing more of. @David, the DFA100WR would have done the job too but would have been a bit long. Looking retrospectively at the data from these shots I definitely have a predilection for shooting my style of portraiture at around 80mm. Which is good as it also confirms why I need the FA77. Anyway, glad that you all enjoyed the images.

Fine looking building. Funny how, without reading anything, I was drawn to the M28 shots. Blue door image for me.

I guessed you were a bloke fom the first line. Welcome.