With respect, John, a professional has to make every shot count. For that reason alone, RAW is well worth using because it acts as a great insurance policy against inaccurate exposure.

Whilst YOU may be able to guarantee perfect exposure with every shot, busy professionals don't necessarily have the time to take accurate readings with hand-held exposure meters. They often have to shoot first and ask questions afterwards. RAW gives them much greater latitude than JPEG.

Then there's the question of the need to tweak the image a bit for reasons other than wrong exposure. The possibilities are much greater in RAW because you have much more information to work with.

So I think Arthur is right in saying that RAW is for professionals. Serious amateurs with a leisurely approach to static subjects may allow themselves the luxury of shooting JPEG, but that's what it is - a luxury.

And finally, once you've got a handle on Silkypix or one of the other converters, processing RAW doesn't really take very much time - arguably less time than trying to disguise even slightly ill-exposed JPEGs.

G

There were no KA lenses at the time of the K2 (I bought one in 1975).

KA lenses appeared with the Super A (the clue is in the name ) in 1984. (I bought one in 1985).

The SMCP-A 1:1.4 50mm came out in 1984.

Incidentally, Boz lists the Super A as coming out in 1983, but since there were no KA lenses then, and since cameras almost always came with a normal lens in those days, I suspect he is wrong. But perhaps it was announced in 1983, and appeared on the shelves in 1984. This sort of thing is not unusual with Pentax, as we know!

G

I think we might find that different camera bodies give different results, showing that this is not an across-the-board design fault, but a manufacturing defect in some samples.

G

No pre-judging involved! You whinged, and even confessed to it. ("Sorry. Do I sound like I'm ranting? "

But I am sorry to hear about your problem, and from what you say, you don't appear to be doing anything silly, despite my suggestion to that effect.

However, I do urge you to try a controlled experiment with an A or later lens of the same focal length, and with different combinations of metering method. It would then be interesting to see other users try the same combinations with their cameras.

G

I can't argue with that. Use what works best. But at the moment the jury is still out on whether it's some K10Ds that have the alleged problem, or certain users.

I'm prepared to believe that there may be a problem with some cameras. My own experience, however, with the two pre-A lenses that I use often, is that the camera works fine.

G

The Weston measures the light falling on the subject. The camera's meter measures the light coming through the lens. I know which I prefer to use.

G

Examples please. Or is this just a hollow-sounding, arm waving comment from a whinger who bangs on and on and on and on....?

Yes. I suspect that you, and the others who claim to have a problem, are doing something silly.

G

"Wireless" doesn't mean radio. The remote flash is controlled by a burst of little flashes from the RTF or body-mounted flashgun. It's a bit like Morse code on a torch, but much quicker.

G

They are in fact physically identical under the skin, but they have slightly different software.

All the important features of the K10D are possessed by the GX10.

In the EU, (which includes the UK! ) all consumer items have a 2 year guarantee, by law. Retailers don't like people to know that.

G

This is a rare instance of JR being less than 100% correct. The first three VS1 70-210s were very good lenses indeed. However, JR is right to say that they are heavy and unwieldy.

I don't know why the poster is turning his nose up at the Pentax-F 70-210, which, unlike the A version, will work very well with both his cameras. It is a very fine lens.

G