The best focal length for macro, assuming you want to take pictures of bugs, is 200mm, but these lenses are not cheap. The Pentax A* and FA* 200mm macros are especially fine and stratospherically expensive.

More affordable are the 100mm lenses. Pentax's new D-FA 1:2.8 100mm is very good, as is the older FA version. The latter goes for around £200 on Ebay, and this would be my preferred choice for a general purpose macro of high quality.

In the same sort of range, Tamron do a 90mm which is highly regarded, and probably cheaper.

For more like £50.00, you can get an older Pentax-A 50mm 2.8, which is especially good for copying documents.

G

We all struggle to focus in low light, not just cameras. It's because we use light to focus, and when there isn't any, we have a hard time doing it.

G

Interesting review of 18-55:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/pentax_1855_3556/index.htm

G

It had better be!

G

I'm not Matt (he said, stating the blindingly obvious), but I have had a 24-90 for the past three years, and was very impressed by the optical quality of the lens.

Subjectively (because I never did any formal tests), I would rate it as sharper than many of my older M primes. It was on my recent "For sale" list (and has found a buyer) purely because I have ordered a 16-50 and wouldn't expect to use the 24-90 so much once the 16-50 arrives.

As a single lens solution, the 24-90 is probably better suited to walking around in the country, whilst the 16-50 is more a creature of the city.

An oddity of this lens, which is disconcerting at first, is that the barrel wobbles when extended. Lots of people have commented on this, but nobody (AFAIK) has noticed any adverse effects on the picture.

I used it quite a lot, and liked it.

G

To save you the trouble of asking.....

The 31mm is my most used lens, and aside from the rather silly permanent lens hood (which is not much use on digital), I have nothing bad to say about it. Image quality is superb.

Also, the FA 20mm is fine, and available on Ebay. I'm happy with mine. The FA* 24 is alleged to suffer from CA on digital, but whether the allegers are pixel-peepers or humans, I don't know.

There are of course also the 43mm Ltd (lovely, though a slightly awkward focal length on digital, which is why mine is on sale), and the 14mm and the 21mm, as Will has mentioned.

Two points:

1 As Matt says, modern zooms are capable of results to rival prime lenses. The downside is that they are not as fast. But unless speed is absolutely essential to you, it is unwise to ignore them.

2 And don't ignore Ebay either - or other second-hand sources. Almost all my lenses came from Ebay (including two of my Limiteds. The other came from a contributor to this thread!). Whatever you might have read about Ebay, it works pretty well 99% of the time.

G

PS: I reckon that the following wide prime lenses range from good to great, and are relatively easy to get hold of:

DA 14mm
FA 20mm
DA 21mm Ltd
FA 28mm
FA 31mm Ltd
FA 35mm
DA 40mm Ltd
FA 43mm Ltd

Not too bad, surely? And that's just AF lenses.

All Pentax AF cameras provide focus confirmation with any manual lens, provided there is sufficient light for the AF sensor to operate. I've never tried, but I would presume it would also work with a black cat in a coal cellar provided the camera or flash unit had a focus beam.

G

Electrical tape!

G

If you are trying to disable all the contacts, it would be simpler to buy a little cold-shoe attachment. That's how I use 5-pin flashguns on a flash bracket.

A cold-shoe is like a hot-shoe, but with no electrical connections. Made of plastic, not metal.

The flash-gun is then connected to the camera with a 5P cable.

G

Sorry, that's impossible. Don't you know that you need a 4x5 or bigger negative to print 4x6 metres?

G