The pigeon picture works well for several reasons (colour, light, composition, pose, near-perfect sharpness (perfect had it been on the eye), but also because it fills the frame. The other pictures are more feeder than bird.

If your lens won't allow you to shoot wide-open (to increase shutter speed and blur the background) and also to crop ruthlessly, then you will need a new lens - if you want to shoot birds seriously.

Good luck

G

Any pics?

G

Me too.

The last works best for me. I like the way the falls splay out, and I like the very modest amount of blur. Much better than the cliched waterfall shot where everything looks airbrushed.

G

Doug, my posts, as always, are deadly serious.

G

£249 is a lot for a camera with 90,000 miles on the clock. Ask SRS if they will guarantee the shutter and mirror to 250,000. Otherwise - avoid.

G

You might like my latest gallery post then.

G

9 The camera won't fit in the bag!

Thanks Stu.

G

Well, as a lonely voice crying in the wilderness, I shall present the case against grips.

1 They are very expensive, and do very little.
2 They make a petite Pentax look like, and weigh nearly as much as, a lumpen, bloated, camera like a Canon.
3 They make your arms ache if you are using them for long periods.
4 In practice, you almost never need the extra battery, unless you are so dis-organised that you go to a shoot with a flat battery in the camera. And pockets were designed to carry things like spare batteries.
5 The correct way to hold a camera is with your right hand holding the body, and your left holding the lens. Balance doesn't come into it.
6 There are much cheaper and easier ways to carry a spare card. But again, how often do you need one?
7 It's child's play to hold a camera vertically. You don't need a grip.
8 You can put the money saved towards another lens.

But, there is one massive argument in favour.

The production cost of a grip is a couple of quid. The rest is profit. If Pentax weren't selling loads of grips, they'd have to raise the price of the camera.

So, keep buying grips, chaps. They're a thoroughly good idea.

G

Sean,

The only questions I can see are these:

One. "Can this be rationally explained?"

Yes, it can. And you'll be glad to hear that the answer is really quite simple. The camera has proved popular, so Pentax are able to charge more for it than they originally thought.

But amidst the gloom, there is good news for those who can't presently afford it. Eventually, demand will slacken off, and the price will fall.

As you grow older, Sean, you will become used to this sort of thing. Economists call it "Supply and Demand".

And now the second question. "Please explain how someone who is prepared to buy a camera at 900 pounds "cannot afford" the extra 70 pounds?"

This one isn't too hard either. Somebody who has saved £900 can't afford £970.

And somebody with £900 of credit left on his credit card can't afford £970.

And somebody who runs his life on strict budgetary principles (that word again!), and who has budgetted £900 for a purchase, can't afford £970.

I could go on... and on.

But I think it is time for a new topic.

G

If you ever take the bottom plate off a Spotmatic, you will find the camera is very crude mechanically. Like my old Lister diesel, Spotties are reliable by reason of being very much over-engineered, and by being assembled by loving hands.

G