Clearly the point has been missed. The point is pretty much what Gwyn wrote, but as I see it we don't have all the facts so getting upset on someone else's behalf isn't very constructive. We should leave SRS to sort out whatever they can, and for the OP to communicate with them as best he can. Splashing it all over the internet doesn't really help.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with either upsetting or not upsetting Pentax, with whom I don't have any axe to grind one way or another. What it means is I wouldn't take any notice of it all in my own buying decisions, which are guided by my own experiences.

It doesn't tend to be much of a problem for most of the time and the appropriate sections are always at the top. It depends on how much time there is to redevelop something more formal when it's all very much member created and hence easily modified as we go along.

I guess if it becomes a problem then it will need to be looked at.

JAK asked about needing permission for publishing candid pictures of people, and of course in the UK we don't need that as such, provided we don't show people in ways that demean them or misrepresent them.

The further question was
So here's a new thread to discuss that, without derailing the Your Photos thread.

My take is that Google blur the images of faces because it's all shot at random and they might run into trouble if, for example, someone was shown somewhere they shouldn't be, or it even seemed so. Or it might ridicule them by some mischance. The potential is there for claims perhaps, so safer to avoid the issue altogether.

As for schools, they don't all ban pictures and there's no particular reason why they should. There's been some hysteria about it all. but certainly in the schools I see plays at there's no restriction. Except on video, where there can be copyright issues with the licence to perform that the school has obtained. In any event, publishing on Facebook and the like should be taken with due care, and consideration for any parents who don't want their child's image on the internet. In most cases, a group of parents/friends may well share their images with each other, using privacy settings if they wish to.

I'd raise those points in another thread so we don't hijack this one?

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/permissions-for-candids--55428

There's no privacy law in the UK and permission is not needed to publish these photos. It's something that might be different in other countries.

I like them all apart from the last one, where the focus has missed the eyes and the hat is sharper.

Gwyn, there's a link on the competitions area to take us to this forum and the rules and guidance. I've added some further comments regarding posting before the competition is closed, so hopefully that will cover it.

Many thanks for the suggestions.

You're right about the Q 03 Fisheye lens Nigel. It's a tricky one to focus properly, but when it's right it's actually pretty good.

In theory, every lens should be sharper wide open if it were a perfect lens. Diffraction would progressively reduce sharpness as we stopped down. However, lenses are not perfect, so typically they will peak maybe two stops down from wide open.

Without seeing the testing method or the lens in question though it's hard to see how you are getting the result you report.

Well, it wouldn't influence my buying decisions, which are based on my own experiences. In any event, whatever this grumble may be, it doesn't seem to have fully played out yet, nor do we have the response to it from the the other parties involved. So how can we judge?

You pay import duty, handling charges and then VAT on the lot. It can add a lot of money to your purchase. And what do you do if something is faulty?