I'm considering my options for possibly replacing my Samsung GX-10, and have been catching up on the more recent Pentax models. I see that the K30 is often referred to on various sites as 'entry level', or as a beginner's DSLR. Looking at the specs and reviews, though, it seems to me to have at least the same level of control possible for a more experienced photographer as my GX-10 (K10D) does, possibly more. Have I misunderstood something about it? Or is it only entry level by virtue of the fact that there's the K5 above it in the Pentax range? I'm all in favour of something which is easy to get started with, as long as it doesn't hold me back.

I'm sure it'll be quite familiar to many people on here. You have a bunch of cameras and you think "I don't need all these, I'll sell these two on eBay and buy this one", or whatever. It doesn't quite go according to plan, and once the eBay frenzy has died down, you realise you actually have more cameras than you started with.

The 300mm one is likely to be the most expensive one to replace, I imagine. I could swear I had an A 50mm lens, but having looked through all my lenses, I find I have 3 M ones instead (including the XR Rikenon f2 lens of legendary sharpness).

If this question is addressed to me, then the answer is Pentax ME Super and Ricoh KR 10 Super for a long time. I still have a Ricoh XR-X and KR 10 Super, and a Pentax P30N (2 more film SLRs than I need, but this was a result of a process of rationalisation via eBay a few years back, which ended up wholly irrational!).

Well, actually I primarily chose the GX-10 as my first digital SLR because it could use the first-rate prime lenses I had acquired over the years for my Pentax and Ricoh (K-mount) film cameras. As mentioned above, these are 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 135mm, and 300mm lenses, and of these only the 28mm is an A lens, all the others are M, so I do have to "accept some compromises", as you put it. Although I think the GX-10 is a great camera, I'm not sure I would have gone for it if I'd known about the metering problems with M lenses beforehand.

Maybe I just need a better workaround for using these M lenses.

Sorry, froeschle, I don't get what you mean here.

From the stuff you quote about the red curve and the blue curve, am I right in thinking that with A lenses, and the lens set at A, the exposures should be correct, and that the only problem is with M lenses (of which my 300mm is unfortunately an example)?

I wonder has anyone catalogued their own experiences with this somewhere? The lens I have the most problems with is my 300mm (SMC Pentax 1:4 300mm), which I use to take bird photos with from time to time. With other lenses, where I'm typically taking landscapes, I'm normally able to take my time and fire off a couple of test shots from which I can judge the necessary adjustments to make, but birds don't tend to wait around long enough for this process.

OK, I should have said DSLR ultimate quality. It's different. I don't think your average first-time buyer of an SLR would even know what a medium-format camera was.

There's a point I'm surprised no-one has made (unless I've missed it in this somewhat lengthy thread). Pentax may not actually sell that many FF sensor cameras if they were to produce one, but it would have a very marked effect on the Pentax brand as a whole, which would likely induce many more customers to buy cameras lower down the range.

People like the association with ultimate quality, even if they don't actually want to fork out the money to buy the top-end product itself. At the moment, Pentax is not associated with the ultimate in photographic quality, because it does not have a real high-end option. If it did, all other products in the range would acquire a kind of reflected glory, and thus higher sales. Logically it makes no real sense, but that's consumerism for you.

I have a Samsung GX-10 (basically a rebadged K10D) which I originally bought because I had a decent collection of Pentax lenses from film cameras over the years (28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 135mm, 300mm). I have to say I've used these lenses rather less than I expected to, largely because I've found the exposure to be rather difficult to get right with them. It's a while since I used any of them, but my recollection is that round the middle of a given lens' aperture range, the exposure set by the camera was pretty good, but as one gets closer to the edges of the range, the exposure might be an f stop or more out (can't remember which way).

I'm contemplating getting a repair done on my camera (for another reason) but am weighing up getting a newer replacement instead, and one of the factors which might sway me is if this issue has been improved in any more recent models. Can anyone using older film-era primes tell me if there are still any exposure issues, and if not, what camera are you using? Thx.

I have to say I have no pressing requirement to upgrade, as I'm very happy indeed with the image quality from my GX-10 for landscapes, which is what I normally photograph. The tilt is the only problem (apart from a minor issue to do with exposure in older prime lenses, which I'll raise a separate post about).