I think you'll find the K5 body is more than 10% smaller than the d7000, which is more than 10% smaller than the Canon 7D (I've compared them). I make that fractions of 9/10 and 8/10 approximately. The 16-50 is also about 8-9/10 as long as the Nikon 17-55. These differences look significant in real life, and was the main reason I went for the K5.

I didn't mean there was a vast difference, in fact the K5 is not vastly bigger than my Leica - it's not so long for a start.

I've hardly used this lens, having bought it from SRS in November. It was a bit wide for me, but is a wonderful little lens which is in equivalent to new condition. The box, papers, case, hood and caps all supplied. £300 Paypal gift or bank transfer.

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0443.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0446.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0447.jpg[/IMG]

I'm slimming down after a lens buying rush, so here's another lens for sale. Once again boxed with all papers, soft case, lens caps and hood. Glass pristine, only very slight signs of use. £285 Paypal gift or bank transfer.

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0427.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0422.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0421.jpg[/IMG]

It's a wonderful lens, but I'm now using the 35 macro most of the time, and the 43 is just too close in focal length for me. So here's hoping it reaches a nice new home.

It is in mint condition, with its original box, caps and bag. It is the made in Japan version, which some say has better build. £400 by Paypal gift or bank transfer.

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0442.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0438.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0437.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/20111127-IMGP0434.jpg[/IMG]

I prefer the second one too, but I differ in my assessment of the first one. In my view the tower is a point of interest in the shot, but is in shadow, and the eye is drawn to the sunlit parts of the scene, which do not have as strong a point of interest.

I agree, they're all great photos, but number 3 is the one I like best. Stunning. I've just put some of my own photos from the London fog on the forum too.

Interesting to see your post, as I've just moved from a Leica M film system to Pentax. The K5 is certainly a great choice of camera, and paired with the pancake lenses like the 21,40 and 70 it is highly compact.

However, you might be best explaining what you've been using, since choice of prime lenses is quite personal. Also, what you count as being bulky depends on what you're used to. The K5 and a zoom lens seem large to me, but are a fraction of the size of equivalent Nikon/Canon kit.

I initially started with the K5 and a 21, 43 and 100 macro, but found the 43 too long for general use and the 100 too large given the limited amount of macro work I do. Now I'm experimenting with the Pentax 35 macro and a Tamron 17-50, but hope to settle on a system shortly.

Another recommendation for the 55-300. I'd never used a long telephoto before, and I found this lens pleasing easy to use. Quality wise, it seems sharp enough. The main limitation I found was getting the focus right!

[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/6468593867_04ce1b1fb9_b.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/6468636303_a16aa2a333_b.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m492/Iuvenis/6468609449_4e893567b7_b.jpg[/IMG]

Here we go, I completely misunderstood how to post pictures here - I thought the link to Flickr meant everyone could see them

I got the Tamron 17-50 at a good price. I haven't used zooms much in the past, but thought I would give it a try. I haven't used it that much, but initial indications are that it's a decent lens. It has a satisfactory build, bulky but not really heavy. The AF works, I haven't had enough time with it to test AF shortcomings.

In terms of IQ, it's one of those lenses that is world class in the centre at all apertures(ie. as sharp as good primes, I'm not joking)but is not so stellar in the borders, although even there it's good. I got some annoying CAs at 17mm f2.8 which I couldn't get rid of easily with Lightroom, but that may be my lack of skills.

Overall, a good lens and terrific value. I did hear all sorts of horror stories about decentering etc. however, so I tested mine before I committed.