First I think you'll find that the M, A and FA lenses are optically the same.
So all the 50mm f1.7s will be identical, and all the 1.4s will be identical.

Then the question becomes what is the difference between the 1.7 and 1.4 lenses.

The 1.7 design is more versatile in that it responds better to close up work (flatter field especially at close distances) and can be happily abused with close up lenses, bellows, reversing telephotos on it and anything else you like to try. It will have higher resolution, although at smaller apertures for normal distances it won't make any difference.

The 1.4 design has higher contrast at the expense of lower bald resolution fugures, but again at normal distances it won't make much difference. More field curvature is the price of the speed, but it's intended for low light and reportage work. I have seen it said that it has better 3D modelling and bokeh than the 1.7 but I'm not sure about that.

All the 50mm lenses are superb designs.

As to the other question, I would expect the 16-50mm to be better than the old 28mm lenses mostly on account of chromatic abberation, but I can't confirm that yet, but we are talking here about radically different beasts.

No problem with the "rant" but you both have a point.

George is probably right that modern lenses are "better". They have to be because of the resolution requirements of the sensors and the appropriate circle of confusion. Smaller formats generally need higher resolution figures. Equally well, coatings of especially the rear elements have had to be improved as the CCD is a very reflective device. Modern zooms in the higher price brackets have probably never been better.

This of course applies to digital and when we use film camera lenses on digital they can be great (50mm lenses as an example) they can also be dreadful because of the lower degree of correction of chromatic abberation and also the divergent light path. The latter is not important on film, but is on digital.

So when you get your K10D some of your lenses may be disappointing. I suspect that the 120mm will be one that disappoints, but I'll be happy to be proved wrong.

You are very much right when you mention viewfinder clarity. The silver coated pentaprisms of the ME and MX cameras are fantastic and not equalled today. Having said that, the Pentax DSLRs probably have the best viewfinders of the current crop.

I wonder how you'll feel in a couple of months time. I was a die-hard film fan, but once digital could deliver the goods there was no turning back. I haven't shot any film (apart for Images of England) probably for three years now. It's still in the fridge...

I seem to remember Matt doing a test with the 16-45mm when it was new, to see how it fared on full frame. It wasn't at all bad as I recall, so 1.3x might be OK for at least some of the lenses.

It would be interesting indeed if it turned out that they were all designed for a 1.3x crop sensor.

How about now? Nothing to add to what you said, George, but happy to say hello!

The K10D is much newer and improved technology and the JPEG images can be expected to be better. Yhe extra MP makes a significant improvement to image quality as well. Faster processing means slicker operation and the ability to use 3 fps "motor drive" for an unlimited number of JPEG images.

The weatherproofing should be fine for light to moderate rain, snow, etc.

The features are typically pentax and you will find everything where you expect it to be.

All the lenses can be used with the usual restrictions on any that have no "A" setting.

As regards the battery, it may be more expensive but it is far more efficient and lasts for many hundreds of shots. One battery and the charger should be with the camera, and an extra battery can be obtained for maybe £40 (for a Pentax one)

Don't forget that every camera model has a slightly different RAW file, so software may need to be upgraded to recognise it.

Welcome to the forums, hope to see lots of posts!

Now how would we know, Peter, we haven't seen your reprints....

I'm in a black and white mood myself at the moment and trying them out on EPZ over a few days.

I like ThePup's picture very much, especially the grainy sky. There's a graphic quality to monochrome that colour can totally spoil. In the case of this picture I think colour would definitely spoil it. Well done.

Keep the camera as warm as possible whilst outdoors, probablt in a pocket until you want to use it. Cold and digital cameras don't mix very well and they quote their useable range only as low as zero degrees C.

When you come back into the warmth the best method is to keep it in a sealed plastic bag until it warms up, and that could be some time. If you take it out too soon you will get masses of condensation for sure.

Lithium batteries are probably best, and you should get these easily enough from Jessops and elsewhere, but they still don't like the cold and will quickly stop working until warmed up again.

A film camera would be best in some ways at these ultra-low temperatures, but film becomes brittle, so care is needed there too.

Hope that helps!

Quite a few people at the club have now gone the Pentax/Samsung route, and they are getting great results.

Now I just have to convert all the Canon users. I don't mind Nikon so much...

Probably look at the Custom Settings menu and set up the camera to do what you want.

It would be interesting to see some pictures, so please do post some.