Anything is possible, but I do think the firmware is unlikely to be the problem. Send me a file using the personal messaging system, and I'll see if I get the same problem on my system. If you can't attach a file, let me know and I'll send you my email address.

There's certainly no harm re-installing your firmware, using the latest version.

G

Just to expand on that point, Irfanview has two ways to rotate files, and only one is "lossless". This one requires that you install the Irfanview Plugins, and use Shift-J to rotate. The batch rotation is almost certainly NOT lossless.

Windows programs often fail to "release" a file they have been using when it is closed, and I suspect this is the problem here. I am sure you have another program open which is preventing you from modifying your jpegs in any way at all, not just rotating. Close everything, especially any download programs, then try again.

I take it you are using a card-reader, not USB?

I have three computers using different flavours of XP (Home and Pro) and all work fine with my *ist D jpg files. However, I don't use Pentax or third party download files. I use my own batch file.

G

I don't believe this problem is in any way connected to your camera. A jpeg file is a jpeg file, and nothing Pentax does to it can stop another program from modifying it.

Unless, of course, it has somehow had its properties changed. Right click on the file in the folder and check whether it is marked "read-only". If so, unmark it.

G

The old Vivitar 287 guns had a voltage, I believe, of several hundred volts, compared to the modern average of around 3 or 4 volts. This is because the hotshoe trigger circuit was used by the flash as part of the flash discharge circuit. In other words, when the flash fired, the whole lot was pushed through the camera.

This is how they used to do it, and cameras were designed to handle it.

Many modern cameras have a low flash voltage tolerance, but a credible source has said that even modern Pentax cameras can tolerate voltages as high as 400 volts.

To be on the safe side, just avoid very old guns and very cheap guns. If you have a digital voltmeter, measure the potential difference across the flash contacts (the main one in the centre, and the earth).

G

Sorry, didn't even know it was on. Next year, give a couple of days notice and perhaps somebody will oblige.

Where did you come?

G

The 18-35 is not a highly-regarded lens, but it's not that bad, especially if you can get one cheaply. My first *ist D came with one. Flare control is excellent, but 277 Euro is far too much.

However, I don't know why you are interested. The 16-45 is considerably better, and covers a wider range. Or were you thinking of selling it to finance some other things?

G

You've got three excellent Pentax primes, so no problem there.

You're right about looking the part as a pro tog. You need to buy the biggest flashgun and grip that you can!

G

I think you got an excellent deal, and you have confirmed that the D is still available for those who want it.

Although a bit slower than the DS (which is a significant negative for some people), the D is a more flexible camera, and a better buy for those who like to stretch their equipment.

Coming to lenses, don't even think about an 18-55 if you have the 16-45. The latter is much better, and the two lenses cover almost the same range.

I agree with Matt about the 24-90, but it is expensive, and I would strongly suggest that instead you buy a fast prime lens. This will act as a benchmark; you need to know what a really good lens is like before you can judge others.

The 50mm 1.4 or 1.7 in F or FA versions would be a good starting point, or any of the three original Limited lenses (31mm, 43mm and 77mm).

Then you need something longer, and the choice (if you're on a budget and want a zoom) is really between the new 50-200mm, the F 70-210, and the 80-320. The second and third items can be obtained fairly cheaply on Ebay.

If money is really tight, buy a manual focus 50mm instead of AF.

Those are my suggestions. Others will no doubt have others.

G

A Pentax 50mm macro will be sharper than any normal prime. If you want to do a reasonable amount of macro photography you will soon wish you had a proper macro lens.

As Mac says, Pentax macros tend to come with recessed front elements, which reduces flare and helps to protect the lens. So you save on hoods and filters (if you use the latter).

Macros are more expensive to make than normal lenses, and sell in smaller quantities, so they are rather more expensive. Having said that, 50mm macros are less useful than the 100mm, so command less of a premium. Most people prefer the extra reach of the 100mm, especially for live bugs.

My normal advice would be to get either an A 100mm, or, for more money, an F or FA 100mm. I've just sold my A, but if my eyes were better I would have kept it and sold my FA because although the latter is superb, it's a big beast.

However, the Ebay item, being a late model Takumar, is no doubt a marvellous lens, and seems to be well-priced. For macro work, auto this and that is often more of a hindrance than a help.

G

Good macros are distinguished from ordinary lenses in three ways:

First, they are extremely sharp. The sharpest lenses you can buy.

Second, they will often have a flatter field of focus, to help when photographing documents for example.

Third, they focus much closer than ordinary lenses, although you can obtain the same effect with extension tubes.

Sometimes they will have a smaller minimum aperture too, because DOF is vital at close range.

They make perfectly good general-purpose lenses, although usually larger, heavier and slower than non-macros.

G