I think your logic is sound.

I'm not sure that coupling the 12-24mm with the 28-200mm is a great option as you are mixing a lens of superb quality with one which is of only fair quality.

Pictures from the 18-55mm and the 16-45mm will look equally good to the caual observer or from a distance, but when examined critically the superiority of the 16-45mm will be obvious.

If it helps, Sue and I use the folowing lenses:
12-24, 16-45, 18-55, 24-90, 50-200, 75-300 (all Pentax)

Most shots are taken with the 16-45 (Me) and the 18-55 (Sue) and they look equally good, in fact, I have to say she often produces better pictures than I do....

The 12-24 is superb. However, be careful when coupling that to the 24-90 that you make note of what focal lengths you tend to use. For example, if you shoot mainly in the 20-25 region, you will end up changing lenses a lot and the 16-45 might be a better choice.

Ask the question, which do you need most, wide or telephoto coverage, or maybe macro, or maybe something else...

Only you can decide which lenses you need, but I would suggest you stick with pentax for reasons of quality and ergonomics.

Not sure that there's much to be gained by looking at the first pics yet - we have no idea how they have been cropped or processed. I'm sure the new K10D will be fantastic, and it will also probably get just that little bit more out of the better Pentax lenses.

We live in interesting times!

I noticed the SRS advert in the new AP lists Pentax and Nikon...and no Canon. Is this a prophecy?

The 16-45mm is slightly better than the 24-90mm.

If you are a wide-angle photographer by nature, then the choice is clear.

I also prefer the build quality of the 16-45mm. Despite the 24-90mm being excellent I do find its "loose" construction a bit disconcerting.

There are quite a few publishers of photos, poetry, short stories, etc., that are a form of "vanity publishing". They put your work in a book just to sell you a copy. I have no idea if your picture appears in just one copy (yours) or lots of copies, but I suspect the former.

Incidentally, the picture you sent me was much too big to send by e-mail. Images for e-mail should be resized to a small JPEG and I would suggest a modest file size of no more than 200K.

Nikon have quite clearly said they are going with the APS-C sized sensor. Only Canon and Kodak have had full frame, and that is not without its own problems.

The Nikon and Sony may well have the same CCD chip, but the Canon uses CMOS.

It was disappointing, wasn't it? Still, at least it conveyed some enthusuasm for the product, which is an improvement on the usual indifference.

I still think the classic put-down was when the text of one review of, I think, the *istDS, said something like "Noise is virtually non-existent at ISO 200 and well controlled at higher speeds" and the caption under the photograph said "High speeds exhibit obvious noise". I don't know who writes these captions, but they often don't relate too well to what is being said....