I did think itwas both - in fact, if you read the advertised specs by Park cameras it's quite amusing because they are identical. It might leave a lot of people wondering what the difference is.

No, the differences are very minor.

*istDS and K100D have pentaprism finder, the latter having shake reduction.

*istDL and K110D have pentamirror finder, the latter having shake reduction.

The Samsung models seem to be the same as the *istDS and *istDL.

I like the gorgeous pentaprism finder clarity and so that decides the choice for me. Otherwise, basically any of them would do and the current price of the *istDL2 is very difficult to resist.

I wouldn't worry too much, there is every likelihood that the pentax ethos will continue as before, and as no-one else really offers anything more substantive anyway there's no-where to go for us!

I would just enjoy what we have and worry about the future when it's worth worrying about....

Agreed, George.

Yes indeed, Canon do use CMOS sensors in the DSLRs.

Considering that the pixels are physically much larger in the mamiya ZD chip, it's not very good that noise is such an issue. If anything, the noise levels should be considerably lower.

Hopefully, the Pentax 645D will benefit from Pentax's now considerable experience with digital and it will be a much better camera. I'm sure the sensor is nowhere near 645 in size, but it will be significantly bigger than a 35mm frame.

The *istD2 (for want of a better description!) will I'm sure have an APS-C sized sensor. I can't see Pentax putting so much sffort into the DA lenses only to make them defunct; it's not their style.

I'm curious as to whether we think a "medium format" DSLR will be useful to the amateur? Oe would a full frame 35mm-sized DSLR be more to the point?

The review of the Mamiya ZD in the new AP, which runs to eight pages, concludes that although it can produce stunning A3+ prints there are some serious issues. Firstly, the low pass filter is a whopping £1500 optional extra, without which one gets moire pattern effects in fine detail (such as a model's hair). Secondly, the CCD has a much higher noise level than a full frame Canon 35mm sized chip. Even at 400 ISO noise is a problem, and for a chip that size that is not acceptable as far as I can see.

So, like the Kodak DC14N and the Leica digital back, these very expensive potentially very exciting products are not always up to scratch.

As Matt says, the M and A lenses are equally useful on your camera, as indeed are the original K lenses.

If you want something longer, there is a superb 100mm f2.8. Also a 120mm f2.8 that starts off fairly soft but crisps up as it is stopped down - this might be nice if you do a lot of portraits. The 150mm f3.5 is totally sharp at all stops, an exceptionally nice lens.

If you want a zoom up to 150mm you might look at the SMC Pentax-M 75-150mm f4, bulky by modern standards bit a good lens. Try to make sure you get a good one with no sloppiness in the focusing/zooming action. because this is a "trombone" type zoom, some of them can be too loose to be useable.

However, you can use more modern lenses as well if you wish, with the exception of the recent Digital-only lenses or the FAJ ones without aperture rings. Obviously you won't get autofocus, but you can use the lenses with manual focus.

The basic principle with Levels is to move the left arrow until it meets the histogram, setting the black point. Then move the right slider until it meets the histogram, setting the white point. Finally, adjust the overall brightness by moving the centre (gamma) slider. This will indeed lose some tonal values, but providing it is not too extreme it will not be a problem.

However, bear in mind what the histogram represents and a picture of, say, largely black, will have a histogram bunched to the left - and so it should. So doing what I have just described may be way too severe.

So moderate adjustment to taste is the way to go!

When converting to BW in Photoshop it's worth looking at the red, green and blue channels independently to see if any of those gives you the tonal quality you want. If one does, select it, go to Image>Mode>Greyscale and discard the other channels when prompted.

If you need a mix of channels, then Channel Mixer is the powerful way to convert.

I think one of these methods may cure the tonality of your picture, which lacks sparkle, but which has lots of potential and I think is very worth working on.

I had the same problem exactly with a SMC Pentax-A 50mm f1.7 lens and I tried to repair it as well. I failed miserably and now would not dream of opening another lens. Well at least not with any anticipation that I would be using it again!