I love the second picture, the pink and yellow background really sets the subject off nicely. And yes, it reminds me of a plane waiting for take-off too, excellent capture!

The first picture just looks a little flat to me (even in your revised version), I'm not sure you can do much about that in PP, it's really about getting the light right at the time of capture. If I can, I always try and shoot in available natural light; if I have no option but to use a flash then I make sure it's well diffused so that it gives a more "3D" feel.

Because different people use their screens in different ways. I rarely use mine to check for things like "sharpness" as I know from bitter experience that I'll be disappointed with what it shows me - I wait until the image is loaded into the PC where I can have a proper look at the technical side of things.

I do, however, use the LCD screen for checking composition in the field and having the fine increments at the start of the zoom range allows me to better judge how various crops will work ("if I get rid of the lampost will his ear still be there?" etc).

It's nice of Pentax to give us the option of starting at a higher magnification (for those that use their camera that way) but I for one would be gutted to lose the finer control that you get at the start of the range. Each to their own...

Old and rotten light seal foam is one of the hardest things to remove from any surface (it seems to take on the consistency of permanent marker ink the second it touches anything you don't want it to touch) - the trick is to keep persevering. Lighter fluid will do the trick eventually but don't be suprised if it takes hours rather than minutes. I don't know of a quicker way or a more effective cleaning solution but if anyone else does then I'm all ears...

In an ideal world - as you've discovered - you shouldn't let the old foam come into contact with the focussing screen. However, now it's done you have nothing to lose in cleaning the screen.

I use lighter fluid and dab it on with a cotton bud. Rub the screen very, very gently with the bud and when you start seeing dirt build on the bud then change it for a new one - repeat as often as neccessary. Take your time and don't apply pressure, let the lighter fluid do the work. Whatever you do, don't touch the surface with anything sharp or it will scratch very easily and you won't be able to repair the screen. Don't overload the bud with fluid or it can drip down into other areas that you don't want it dripping into (although in reality it probably won't do much harm and will dry off quite quickly). Finally, it's worth mentioning once more; take your time!

You should find your screen's as clean as a whistle when you've finished - if there's still corroded foam in there then get it all out before you start cleaning otherwise it'll just drop onto the screen again and you'll be back to square one...

Good luck!

Suprised about the Sugababes, I missed their set as I was watching Lupe Fiasco on the Glastonbury interactive service and just switched back in time to miss them. I've been impressed with their live performances in the past which is why I suggested them, but then I guess nerves can get to the best of us - especially with Nelson (and about 80 million others) watching...

I'd probably go and watch Queen with Paul Rogers - I imagine that'd be about as good a sing-along set as you could get this side of an ABBA reunion!

As for Amy, I think she has a wonderful voice and writes cracking tunes but she really needs to go away for a long time and sort herself out. I went to see her live in Camden last year (year before maybe?) and she struggled with the set even then - from what I see on TV since she hasn't got any better. Real shame as she has immense natural talent.

I caught a bit and thought Amy Winehouse was poor (and I like her stuff so I'm usually quick to defend her). I would have liked to see Leona Lewis or even the Sugababes take her role on that one tbh.

I agree Paul Rogers was good though - it would have been easy to replace Freddie with one of countless look/sing-alikes but I think he brought his own style to it in a way that was different to the original without being disrespectful to it (if you know what I mean).

Bit too much of Phillip Schofield for my liking so I was flicking between the concert and the BBC Glastonbury coverage...

I'm with Don on this - an old camouflage jacket would make an excellent (and cheap) solution. Get yer pinking shears out...

Which is the chief advantage (as far as I can see) in favour of the D-FA100.

It doesn't appear to be any better (or worse) than previous incarnations from an optics point of view, yet it weighs considerably less giving it a real world advantage over all its competitors as it's easier to hand-hold for longer exposures. And because it's a lightweight and compact beast you're more likely to carry it with you in the first place.

And it works just as nicely on my MX as it does my K10D. And did I mention Quick-Shift?

No prizes for guessing which one I recommend...

Just a thought but are you using the newer Sigma with the teleconvertor? If there's no aperture ring on the lens, and the camera can't talk to the lens because the T/C is inbetween them, then the lens will be stuck at its smallest aperture at all times (normally f22 or f32 or thereabouts) which would account for severely underexposed images.

I don't use an online service so I can't help much there, but if you have a branch of Snappy Snaps nearby then I can heartily recommend them (and judging by the number of awards they seem to win I'm not alone!).

They do an 'order-online-collect-in-store' service which may suit your needs, website's at www.snappysnaps.co.uk