They are clumsy descriptions Algi, but as far as they go not particularly misleading.

Wide angle lens design used to mean large front elements, for exactly the reason stated in the auction. Early Pentax wide aperture wide angles would be the same. However, lens design moved on from this in the early 1970s and certainly the Prinzflex name (Dixons own-brand) will not excite those who recognise it.

As regards the 135mm f3.5 there are several versions of this and the 5 element versions may well out perform the four element f2.8 and f2.5 versions.

Was the Auto 110 expensive, well, yes, like everything else it was expensive when new and then the price fell.

We have this every time a new profduct comes out - the initial price is high and then it falls and stabilises.

AS regards the viewfinder, I don't know what it is yet, optical or EVF, but an Olympus virewfinder has stabilised out at £199, not too far adrift from £240 RRP.

The GPS unit at £209 is a similar price to the Nikon one at £199.

Like it or not, we're talking about high class engineering and the cost is going to be high.

The Takumar converter is a low cost option to go with the Takumar-A and similar budget lenses, so is likely to be 4 elements.

What is clear is that this will appeal to the same market that bought the Auto 110, which did very well, and more recently the I-10, which by the time the price started falling must have been shifting at quite a rate. It's everywhere at prices people can afford and always getting the reaction, "I like that."

I think people will like the Q, those who don't won't buy. Not a problem. As soon as the price begins to fall, as is always the case with new cameras, then I will be waiting for the moment to jump in and buy.

I suspect the Q will hit the spot, but we'll find out for sure quite soon.

The K-r operates just the same way as the K-x, but is faster and has focus point indication in the viewfinder. It's a lovely camera and will slide seamlessly into your existing style.

Only buy the K-5 if you need weather resistance or the higher pixel count or the better low light performance. Bear in mind you may not have any WR lenses though.

I've removed the e-mail address to avoid you being spammed by all and sundry...suggest any interested parties contact you in this thread or by PM.

Ah, but I've already used Nikon accessories, with Nikon cameras. Maybe I have hidden depths...

The image of the cat is superb!

True, and we don't even know what totally new technology might be around the corner. Maybe one day CCD and CMOS sensors will seem quite quaint.

It's a complex issue, but I'll quote from the conclusions of your link:

This may well be so, and from the lens testing I've done so far I think it looks about right.

As regards the print, I'm happy to accept a figure of around 4 lp/mm for a 16"x12" print, the same as quoted by Roger Hicks in "The Lens Book", but it's an approximation of course. It explains rather well though why the A3 print is about the optimum for quality prints, when viewed at the right distance of course.

The article Stefan links to is very interesting and well worth a read.