I'll be intrigued to hear what you think when you get a k20D in your hands George. I wonder if I should have said "Much better for what I want to achieve" or maybe "Much better as I perceive it" - interesting.....it may be a very personal thing.

As Dan said, there is absolutely no difference.

I think you meant to say "in the Gallery" - the difference may be that the Gallery resizes our images, so perhaps a slightly larger file would be beneficial.

In the Gallery I usually use the same files that I use for my e2 membership of ePHOTOzine. These are 1000 pixels wide on the longest side and a file size of at least 200K and definitely not more than 400K. A typical file size would be 220 - 300K or so.

Why not have a glance at my Gallery pictures and see if they look OK to you - if so, try the spec I've just given.

I'm not clear what you are trying to demonstrate - bicubic resampling may well be common to all these programs.

Every new camera has a different RAW file format, so RAW converters need to be updated from time to time as you upgrade to a new body.

DNG is indeed a universal RAW format, although whether it is as universal as a JPEG is something else.

You won't see much quality difference on the web as the limitation is the resolution of your monitor.

The difference will shout out at you if you view prints of any decent size.

If you don't make large prints then maybe you don't need a K20D or K7.

George was rubbishing the use of a 43mm, or something about 60mm on 35mm, not the 85mm on 35mm film. Actually no, not rubbishing it, but saying it wasn't useful.

135mm lenses are so common because it was the longest lens that could be reliably focused on a Leica rangefinder and hence sort of drifted into use on SLRs. Frankly, I always thought it was too long and that 85-105mm was far better.

85mm is an ideal portrait focal length as it allows close communication with the model and yet we are far enough away to improve the shape of the features and make the images more natural.

This is actually very well known by photographers and always has been.

All 85mm lenses should be excellent as a slightly longer than standard lens is the easiest to design for an SLR.

There is an 85mm f1.4 manual focus lens available new now, under various names, and a search on eBay will find it.

The Pentax 85mm f1.4 designs will be mega-expensive. The SMC Pentax-M 85mm f2 is not my favourite, being a bit weak IMHO.

There are screw thread designs and the SMC Takumars should be OK, but as mentioned any 85mm will be worth a go if the price is reasonable.

Don't forget the 90mm and 100/105mm lenses are superb and not so far adrift from 85mm.

Image quality is much better. Just as the jump from the *istDS to the K10D brought a real jump in quality, the K20D gives a similar jump to a new much higher level.

The Premium JPEG setting, with relatively little compression, gives me the convenience I need and also means that selective cropping can be used with more leeway available.

The release catch for the SD card door is much easier to find and operate.

The AF seems snappier.

The exposure is more accurate and doesn't need the same degree of adjustment that the K10D did.

Noise levels are lower.

Colours are more accurate.

The battery lasts longer, presumably because of the move to a CMOS sensor.

Hope I haven't missed anything, but to be honest I've grown used to it so I might not be thinking so much about how it's better any more. The primary thing is better image quality, by a good margin.

Lovely, aren't owls just gorgeous?