PM sent.

I don't know about your cameras, if they don't allow 'DX override', you may still be able to use them, either in manual mode, by using 'DX' coding stickers (if you can still get them) or by using exposure compensation.

There are loads of bodies with either manual ISO setting or DX override, depends whether you'd prefer manual or autofocus really?

The P30n or P30T are preferable to the earlier P30 (P3 in the US) because they also offer aperture priority (they all have manual and program), they're later cameras too.

There are a lot to choose from, the most obvious/available options are (with available exposure modes) K1000 (M), MX (M), ME-Super (M,Av), Super-A (M,Av,Tv,P), P30n/T (M,Av,P) LX (M,Av) - all manual focus bodies. There are autofocus options too.

It depends on what you're after (Super-A & ME-Super have buttons rather than dials which some people don't like).

John.

Great blog and good photos, sadly I had to let my ex-MOD late IIa 109 go a few years ago...

I limit most of my online photos to 800px along the longest side and watermark my medium format scans with a semi-transparent watermark. It won't stop image theft, but there's not much point trying to share them by plastering a watermark across the middle.

I think flickr tries to re-size the 800px to 1024 when you click on the image to enlarge it, which isn't really desirable.

Then again when I put my first website together in 2000, I was limiting the image to 400px along the long side with very obvious (dreadful) watermarks.

John.

I agree completely, most of the opinions (I hesitate to call them 'reviews') on the web are just that, and most are made without having even seen the item in question.

My own minor contribution to this thread is that I've recently bought an FA20-35/4, mostly for using on film (the DA20-40 wasn't an option for this even if I could justify the cost). At first I felt the 20-35 focal length range wouldn't really work with APS-C (not wide or long enough) and I expected to keep using my DA17-70 mostly. Since using it more, I'm finding it works quite well and the extra reach of the 20-40 would make it more useful again.

When spending this kind of money, you really should check it out personally if you have any doubts though. The way it is built/handles/balances is a big part of the equation for me.

Bump

I started with a non-Pentax ME Super clone (Miranda MS2-Super) with a K mount, then progressed to a Super-A. Because Pentax kept the same mount & flash (Canon changed their mount, Minolta their hotshoe), I bought an SFXn then a Z-1 (HyperProgram & HyperManual were simply awesome then!).

I then decided I needed a change and bought an EOS 5, grip & 28-135 IS lens as a new, fresh start. This was a very expensive, supposedly awesome combination (eye-control AF, the only EOS capable of 5fps without a booster battery). Compared to the Z-1 it was awful to use, plasticy and felt hollow. The lens was huge, heavy and slow (and the IS soon broke), repaired under warranty and then swapped for a plastic 50/1.8 which felt much better. Then the camera broke - it's in a cupboard somewhere I think.

I carried on shooting the Z-1 until going digital with an EI-2000 (hybrid) before concentrating on medium format film for a while. Then in 2012 I went shopping for a mirrorless CSC and horified by the cost of an optional (and horrid) EVF, stumbled on first a Kx then K-5 on display. I picked up the K-5, it felt the same as my Z-1 but better built, I understood it immediately, it took all my old lenses (still) and simply made sense.

To summaraise: lens mount continuity, ergonomics/handling and 'Hyper' exposure modes.

Exposure is a really subjective area (unlike 'sharp' focus for example). Multi-segment metering is a world to itself and you've no idea what the camera is compensating for (or not). From the spec, the K-3 metering sounds much more advanced than the K-5 and it wouldn't be a surprise to find that they did things differently - even before you consider the various optional highlight/shadow/dynamic range settings.

With multi-segment metering, the camera has no idea what effect you're after, or where you want to put the mid-tones/highlights/shadows. Exposure compensation with multi-segment metering is unlikely to get reliable, consistent results because for each scene the relative 'segments' are assessed by the algorithm in an attempt to find a suitable match programmed into the system.

I usually use spot or centre-weighted because of the above reason (I can usually predict how they will react and can apply exposure compensation as required).

They do offer food for free (and/or reduced price) to stop you going somewhere else and to keep your business.

Other supermarkets with similar deals are available.