Some years ago we bought two Pentax coffee mugs, resplendent with ME and the inscription "Simply Hold a Pentax". Sue broke the handle off hers (I know it was hers because it was the broken one...) some time ago, but mine has soldiered on and on. Sadly, dish washers take their toll and my favourite mug is nearing the end of its life...Does anyone know where we can find two replacements?

In a general sense, try to decide what sort of pictures you are likely to be taking and ask whether or not a "compact" will restrict whatever you may decide to do in the future. Might you want interchangeable lenses? If so, then a SLR would be the answer. Also consider whether or not a SLR might not be a better choice anyway (through the lens viewing) and probably almost as pocketable as many non-SLR compacts.
Then, a trip to a friendly photo dealer to handle the various models and see which suits you best.

I think you're right in that it's a wise person who only buys what they need without being influenced by hype, on the other hand Sue and I do like Photoshop and it seems to work pretty fast for us. I guess a repro house would probably need Photshop and all it's facilities and wouldn't even blink at the price!

There's a product to match the needs of every worker - if I'd always got it right over the years I would have saved a small fortune.....

With respect, I would maintain that Photoshop is a very powerful tool, and almost any image can be optimised using it. The file straight out of a digital camera is only the beginning!

The Spotmatic II uses a 1.35v Mercury battery, and it needs to be the correct voltage so that the meter readings are correct.
There are several suppliers, some of whom advertise in Amateur Photographer. Failing that, go to Jessops and ask for the PX400 equivalent Wein cell, actually a zinc alternative. These are not cheap (£5.95?) but they work and are readily available.

The new issue of Amateur Photographer (out in the UK on Tuesday) features a full page spread of pictures by Atherton & District Amateur Photographic Society (ADAPS for short). There are two pictures by Harry Gladson, one by me and one by Dave Roberts.

Anyone interested in our society is most welcome to get in touch.

Extensive tests was something that PHOTO TECHNIQUE was very good at, when it was edited by Jack Schofield. Not only films, but superb issues on different formats, wide angle lenses, telephoto lenses, etc. Then there were the superb lens tests in CREATIVE PHOTOGRAPHY, edited by David kilpatrick. Pentax lenses held up very well indeed in these tests.
These days, I find the efforts of the magazines are very bitty and superficial and there is no real attempt to really cover any field comprehensively.
If it were possible, I would like to see some tests in PENTAX USER, films could be one subject but also how about lenses? Different lenses have different design parameters and can be intended for different applications and it would have saved me a fortune over the years if more information had been available. For example, what different properties could I expect from the 77mm f1.8 lens compared to the 85mm f1.4? Are they both critically sharp wide open, is one softer at wide apertures to be more suitable for portraits, and so on. Meaningful information would be very useful, hopefully better than some of the glossy literature - I have one publication from Pentax that describes almost all the zooms as "the most versatile in the range"! Catchy phrase, but pretty meaningless...

I absolutely take your point on that. Sometimes it seems like just going through the motions, with very little imagination applied.
I am, as you can tell, a great fan of the qualities of Kodachrome. One interesting use is the copying of black and white originals - Kodachrome is very neutral and makes a cheap and reliable method of preparing a slide presentation. The contrast is also well under control and helps in retaining both highlight and shadow detail.
Then again, it can't be perfect because outdoors I tend to stick an 81A filter in front of it!

I've just had two Kodachrome films back (via Switzerland) and the turn round time was six days - better that the E6 films that I sent at the same time to Leicester and are still not back.
Why do magazines invariably ignore Kodachrome when doing film tests - fine grain, unsurpassed sharpness and detail, superbly neutral colours and the best long term stability of any colour film (if kept in the dark). It also should have greater resistance to X-Rays, being a black and white film until development.
My first Kodachrome films from 1969 still look unchanged, but the E4 films from the same era are a nasty shade of purple.
How about a Pentax User film test that includes everything?

The MZ5n and MZ3 are current bodies and can be found at very reasonable prices. (Try Amateur Photographer if you are UK based).
The MX was discontinued in the late 1980's and the LX was discontinued perhaps 3 or 4 years ago, although for some time only very small quantities had been sold in the UK. There was recently a special edition LX, I think released in 2000.
The MX is a small but very well designed fully manual body with a superb GPD cell metering system with LED readout.
The LX is a fully professional system camera with interchangeable viewfinders and fully manual or aperture priority auto exposure. It has special body seals to resist the ingress of water or dust and is very rugged.
Both cameras are well worth buying, but look for mint examples and run the normal checks that you would for any second hand camera. Check all controls work smoothly, open the camera back and fire the shutter at all speeds to check that the progression looks about right, examine carefully for knocks or other damage. Also check the battery compartment in case there has been any leakage and try the meter against a known reliable one. (Have I forgotten anything?)
Hope this helps!