If the Metz was set to TTL instead of P-TTL then it was being triggered by the pre-flash from the camera. If you set it to P-TTL it'll ignore the pre-flash and strobe in sync with the main flash as it should. I'm sure it'll be fine.

From what I understand it's not that they can't, it's just that they couldn't while keeping the price down. Pentax need to recoup the costs of developing the new sensor so economies have been made elsewhere, such as retaining the K10D's body which saves them the tooling costs of new plastic injection moulding equipment. For the changes that have been made (marginally larger screen, PC sync socket, larger memory card door lock, change of angle on AS switch) the existing moulds could be "tweaked" at minimal cost.

If they had put a tilting screen on the K20D - and don't get me wrong, I'd have been as delighted to see it as much as anyone else - then the users (us lot) would have demanded that it also be weatherproofed like the rest of the camera. It's at this point that we start getting into the realms of costly re-tooling to accomodate the (sealed) hinges etc that would have made this possible.

I think a lot of the features people are saying to be missing from the K20D (tilting screen, uprated shutter/mirror box for faster FPS, improved AF, etc) will be incorporated on the K30D, however, I don't expect the K30D to make such a big jump in sensor technology (I think this new sensor will probably be used in the next 2-3 generations while it still owes Pentax money). Pentax are playing a game of incremental improvements as befits a company with (comparatively) limited resources and market share - as long as those improvements are genuinely useful and not just me-too items then I approve of this strategy. That's my opinion anyway...

I didn't know that - you learn something new every day!

Just out of curiosity, does anybody know who's making the rear screen for the K20D/GX20?

I seem to recall reading (though I can't find a link now) that the K10D's came from Sony - which kinda makes sense as the sensors were also sourced from them. Now we're going to be treated to a Samsung/Pentax sensor shouldn't the LCD be of Samsung manufacture as well? When it comes to TV's I do think the current Samsung line are better looking than the Sony equivalents, so I have no reason to think they couldn't do a better job on a smaller version too.

Is any other camera manufacturer touting a suspiciously similar 2.7" screen or could this be another unheralded advantage in the Pentax camp? Anyone with inside info out there (or just wild speculation - I don't mind )?

I've only had call to contact Pentax UK once (via email) and received a helpful reply within 15 minutes - perhaps my experience is not typical though...

Ah, now it makes sense!

In which case I commend your Photoshop skills 'cos I didn't notice any trace of PP in the first example - good work.

I rather like the heart one - how did you manage to draw in the sand like that without leaving footprints? :

I think the snails could do with just a touch more DOF for my own tastes but I like the general exposure/ambience.

It would work, but not with existing lenses. The current "Full Frame" lenses have an image circle that just covers the 35mm frame - in order to account for that frame being moved around they'd need a bigger image circle or you'll have an overlap. My doubt is that the current K-mount can accomodate lenses with an image circle larger than it was originally designed for, hence my assertion that you could have K mount FF with no (sensor based) antishake, or a new mount with FF sensor based anti shake. If it's the latter then they may as well bring back project 645D and be done with it - at least there are already existing lenses for that one.

You managed to say in one sentence what took me two posts and several paragraphs to put across - well done!

Please don't take this as a dig at you ('cos that's not how it's meant) but stop for a moment and ask yourself why Pentax would want to go for the "pro" market?

Pros probably make up less than 1% of the market as a whole and the good ones (the ones that you want your brand associated with) don't pay for their equipment - they expect the manufacturers to provide this for free. Pros also demand a level of service and back-up (think same day replacements of expensive glass in far flung war zones etc) that Pentax doesn't currently provide and that would almost certainly bankrupt it if it tried to. Amateurs are the ones that fund the company and it's amateurs who (through inflated prices) subsidise all those pros at Canon and Nikon - would you really want to pay a premium on your camera just to have the bragging rights to say, "Oh yes, XXXXX used one just like this to take that photo of Charlotte Church with her norks out on the beach that was in the News Of The World last Sunday...". No, nor would I.

A professional photographer is - by definition - someone who gets paid to take photos, and there seem to be just as many (pro rata) that do so with Pentax equipment as with anything else. All the cameras from the major manufacturers (Pentax, Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, etc) are capable of making you a pro as long as you look past the labels and accept that it's just a tool of your trade.

Pentax has a nice niche as a maker of quirky but high quality cameras with excellent IQ and ergonomics to die for. Why chase a market that's already covered by others and almost guaranteed to lose them money? I think Pentax will outlive many of the others in the market today - remember the tortoise beat the hare in the end!