Ditto & Ditto - the recent 'themed' issues either work or they don't but I much prefer the monthly format over the old weekly one.

A few months ago, whilst in an airport I picked up Black & White Photography and another (probably Outdoor Photograper - bit of a rush in WH Smiths) - they both had pretty much the same review of the Sigma DP2 Merrill probably by the same author (one a bit more detailed than the other) and that put me off those completely.

I gave up on certain other magazines in the '90s when the 'Q&A' sections were full of questions like "I've just bought an EOS 1n, the manual says it has evaluative metering, how does that differ from spot metering?".

I buy the occasional AP now, the current one with the K-50 review seems to have a lot more advertisers promoting Pentax than I previously remember.

John.

It wasn't a kit lens in today's sense (a lens sold with a body for £10 more than the body would cost in order to sell the camera). It was one of the 'standard' lenses available with the SFX/SF7 (another being the F 50/1.7). Instead of making them super-cheap, if you couldn't afford it you could just get the 50/1.7 and if you couldn't afford that, you could buy just the body and use it with your existing lenses.

It was a proper zoom lens in the line-up, sometimes sold with a camera (28-80s weren't common then) but remember that with the early AF cameras, fast primes would autofocus much faster (and probably more accurately) than a slower zoom.

Being only a 2x zoom helps the sharpness and fairly 'compact' size compared to later 28-80s or 28-105s.

John.

The IR remote release for the Pentax zoom90-WR film compact (and several others) allowed you to control the zoom remotely. With an FA PZ lens it would be possible to control the zoom from the camera (the Z-1 could in the '90s).

I can't comment on the K01 as I haven't used one. I was concerned about bright sunlight but in the brightest I've tried (full UK sun in June) with the sun on the screen (not my reflection) and with the default camera settings, it was adequate. I don't remember reflections being a problem, the biggest issue has been lack of contrast when fingermarks are on the screen.

The screen tilts up to 90 degrees 'up' and 45 degrees 'down' and I think it would help whenever glare is likely to be a problem - I don't remember having to use the tilt to avoid glare though.

For me the zoom range is roughly equivalent to my DA 17-70 on APS-C. I shoot in RAW+ mode, if you then set the JPEG size to less than 12MP this allows you use the 'Intelligent Zoom' which effectively crops the JPEG in camera. You get a 'full frame' RAW capture and 'cropped' JPEG - really useful when you need quick output.

John.

I'm really impressed with my MX-1, mostly the handling (which is very similar to my K-5) but it has turned out great photos, which I wouldn't have got with a larger camera I didn't have with me. I was looking for a micro 4/3rds when I bought my K-5, but the size difference felt minimal (especially if considering one with a viewfinder). The lack of a viewfinder did put me off at first, but having used it, it's not an issue. Being able to tilt the screen up/down is a definite benefit.

I was going to wait for the GR (I also have a GR1s film camera), but by the time I'd have added the finder, 21mm adapter and hoods etc. it would have been too expensive to justify buying a fixed lens wide-angle camera.

The best advice is to go to a shop and try them all out. I can't think of any reason why a hotshoe would be useful to me on a compact - OK you could fit an EVF but I wouldn't pay £200 for one! My Minox 35mm compact doesn't have a built-in flash but I've never used its hotshoe or carried a flash gun around with it.

I feel things have moved on from FF, which would now be so expensive to develop that the unit costs would probably be too high. Presumably we'd all like to see an FF, but how many of us would pay 1.5-2K for one?

There's so much more that could be done, most of which would be much cheaper to develop and much more widely appreciated and useful in expanding the user base (which is more important right now).

What we really need is clarity, I've been holding off buying more DA lenses 'just in case' and making do with various older lenses when I might otherwise have been tempted to stock up on new ones.

I've decided to keep this now.

Thanks for those that looked.

John.

For Sale: Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 150mm f/4 (M42)

EDIT: corrected the focal length, it's 150mm.

In good optical condition, no fungus or significant marks, slight dust and snappy aperture. Externally good condition with some slight 'brassing' to the aperture/focusing rings.

Supplied with original caps.

£65 including RMSD to the UK, payment by cleared cheque, bank transfer or Paypal with fees.

Thanks for looking.

John.

Hi All,

For sale: Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 105/2.8 with original case, hood & caps.

In good optical condition, no fungus or obvious marks, slight dust and snappy aperture. Some slight 'brassing' on the focus & aperture rings but there's an obvious rub mark on the front (metal) cap. Photos on request.

£95 including RMSD to the UK by cleared cheque, bank transfer or Paypal with fees.

EDIT: This is M42 of course.

John.