I've been called a lot of things in my life but logical isn't usually one of them...

As for trying out the 31, even I know I'd end up buying it! Gotta keep my wallet close and my mind focussed for the time being.

I agree with the comments above; namely that (a) liveview is more of a gimmick than an essential tool and (b) the camera that takes the best photos (surely the desired result?) is the one that feels most comfortable in your hands.

One thing I did notice though is that you mention battery life as a "pro" for Nikon - I've never done a comparison and I'm quite happy to accept that Nikon batteries last longer on a charge, however, I can normally get around 400-500 photos (including a lot of rear screen use and the odd flash too) on a single charge with my K10D. The K20D is supposedly even better so that leaves me wondering just how much life you need from your batteries? Unless you're planning to spend months in the desert and away from a wall socket then I don't think it should really play too heavily in your decision process.

There are no "bad" DSLRs currently on the market so it really comes down to you. I went with Pentax because I tried the (equivalent at the time) Nikons, Canons, Sonys and Olys and I found the Pentax the most comfortable to hold and use - being comfortable with my camera makes me a better photographer and so the same will apply to you.

Don't get caught up in the minutae of reviews on the 'net and elsewhere, it's like letting someone else pick your clothes, your food or your taste in music. Go to the shop and play around - you may have to look a bit harder or travel further afield to find Pentax gear but then that's one of the downsides of exclusivity...

If you stick around then welcome to the forum, if you go with Nikon then good luck.

I think you'll be very happy with that combo and the 100 macro would make an excellent later addition.

I love the central part of the picture with all the skeletal shadow detail, but I think there is too much space on the left and right which doesn't contribute much for me. I think I'd probably go for a square crop and chop off the sides if it were mine.

I'm not even allowing myself to look at any of the DA* lenses - get thee behind me temptation!

I think for first efforts they're not bad at all, however, you did ask for some feedback so here's mine:

Photo #1. The point of focus seems to be running down the middle of the car (the bonnet ornament seems to be the sharpest thing) and it takes the eye away from the signature on the door, which is where I'm guessing you want the eye to be drawn. I would have chosen a smaller aperture to increase the depth-of-field here so that the whole car was sharp. I do like the framing though!

Photo #2. I think the focus point is right here but this time it's the framing that I'm not so keen on. There's a lot of empty space on the right of the car and I think this would be better suited to a square crop in order to get rid of some of it.

Photos #3 & 4. Again, I think these would have benefitted from a smaller aperture to broaden the area in focus. Also there's quite a bit of empty space which doesn't really add anything to the pictures - a different angle when taking the photos would have helped.

Photo #5. The best of the lot! There's a little too much space around the top and the right (which you could easily crop out) and again I'd rather see a little more of the larger balls in focus, however, I can see the bullys / small kids story in there and it works well for me. A good photo.

Don't let any criticisms put you off; like I said at the start these are very good for first efforts so keep practising and soon you'll be quality photos time after time...

I can vouch for both - excellent on digital and truly sublime on film!

So you're the little voice inside my head that keeps telling me I should buy the 31 while I have the chance?

It's a tricky decision, if I don't buy the 31 I know I'll kick myself down the line for all the reasons you've stated; if I don't buy the DA35 I'll kick myself down the line because the 31 doesn't focus close enough, is too big, doesn't have quick shift... Short of buying both (which I really can't justify right now) I don't know which way to turn - hence some more thinking time I reckon.

Not really, if I was still going for the 31 I'd want a silver one to match the 43 and the 77 - but I keep looking at pictures from the DA35 and together with its small size, macro capability and quick-shift I can't help but think it's the one I'd rather have. If I matched it with, say, an A35/2 I'd have the option of a fast 35 on both cameras and the two together would still leave a chunk of change from the price of a 31.

I hate spending money (bah humbug!) so maybe I'll sit on the decision for another couple of weeks...

For a long time now I've been saving my pennies in order to get a FA31 to use on my two Pentaxs (K10D & MX), however, now I'm getting close to the stage where I'm going to shell out the money I'm having a change of heart...

As great as the FA31 seems to be, I can't help but feel I would actually rather have the DA35 Macro to use on digital and I'm now leaning towards that instead. Unfortunately, that would leave me with a gap to plug on the film side so I thought I'd ask you Pentax veterans which 35mm is the best from the back catalogue? Bearing in mind it would be used pretty much exclusively on the MX so things like AF and the A setting are not important. And no, I won't be trying to track down a mythical M35/1.4!

My short(!) list is:

K35/2
M35/2
M35/2.8
A35/2
A35/2.8
FA35/2

As a wildcard I'm also giving serious consideration to a Leica R 35mm (Summicron if I can stretch to it, or Elmarit otherwise) now there are adaptors readily available to turn them into K-mounts and the non-ROM versions can be had (relatively) cheaply.

I notice on Bojidar's site the Pentax lenses have changed optically over the years so which of them gives the "best" overall performance and why?

Any and all contributions and opinions gratefully received!