If only they could! Unfortunately a large expensive lens at f4.5 will let in exactly the same amount of light as a cheap and nasty lens at f4.5 - the difference is that people who can afford large expensive lenses are the same ones who can also afford some nice expensive flash equipment and/or a studio.

It's not a terrible lens optically I'll grant you; in fact for the money it's unbeatable I think. It's just the sheer unneccesary fiddliness of it that grates on me.

From the poorly thought out hood (and quickly replaced rear cap) down to the switches on the barrel. I nearly always have to take my eye away from the viewfinder to get it into macro because I can never remember what I'm supposed to be moving where at the critical moment.

I know it's only petty things, but it's meant mine has spent most of its life stuck in the cupboard...

So glad I'm not the only one

Hello Roscoe, welcome to the forum.

To the left of your picture on the TinyPic site there are 5 options; go to the second one (IMG Code For Forums And Message Boads) and copy the line of text below it (starting with [IMG]...) into the body of message over here - that'll do the trick.

I quite agree, it's only really noticeable if you're looking for it so I'd say that was a successful job; well done

Welcome Cliff

The Panasonic TZ series have long (28-280mm equivalent, f3.3-4.9, Leica designed) zooms and are fairly compact, well made, good value for money and quite capable of turning out high quality results (by compact camera standards).

They lack RAW and any real form of manual control (look to the more expensive LX range for this) but the latest TZ5 has shake reduction, more scene modes than you can shake a stick at, some very clever AI and HD video capability.

That's where I'd start looking anyway...

I think 5 meg seems to be a sweet spot for compacts. I went through a few (from 1.3 to 4 MP) before I got my Contax TVS Digital (5MP) and have subsequently bought three more (higher resolution) compacts, all of which except one (Ricoh GR Digital) have been sold on in favour of keeping the little Contax.

I've now given up on the idea of replacing it this side of something with a considerably bigger sensor - like the Sigma DP1 but with a bit more flexibility hopefully. If that camera happens to wear a Pentax badge I'll be happy to eat my words!

The "sweet spot" from the coated glass doublet (which can be enlarged by using one of the smaller aperture discs) is very sharp indeed. It's difficult to quantify absolutely but I'd say it's considerably sharper than the DA18-55 and only just lags behind the FA43 (which I judge to be my sharpest lens).

As for taking too long, assuming you're using the simple versions the effects you see through the viewfinder are instantaneous so it takes no longer than focussing a traditional lens; although there's certainly a bit of practice needed to get the right effect time after time...

As Don says, the effects could mostly be replicated in Photoshop but that means extra time taken out for PP duties; the Lensbaby lets you take the finished article right away in-camera. It's a matter of taste really but I do quite like the effect for portraits:

[IMG]http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd37/hefty1969/IMGP4038.jpg[/IMG]

Both this image and the one in my last post are completely undoctored with the exception of re-sizing for the web.

To be honest, I wouldn't have bought a Lensbaby if it weren't for the fact that (a) SRS had them in stock for £39.99 and (b) I happened to be in Watford. It's never going to be my most used lens but it can sit happily in the camera bag and come out for special occassions - I've spent more on filters that get used less...