The first is under exposed as you've pointed the camera at a universally bright area. Therefore the camera thinks it's too bright and reduces exposure.

The second has a large dark area that helps compensate, so the average of all the tones works out about right.

Use exposure compensation as needed to correct for uniform areas such as image one.

AF has been via screw drive from the camera motor. This is still that same today as it was in the first Pentax AF SLRs.

What has changed is the new SDM system, where the motor is in the lens. Most lenses are still dual AF, so will work with both systems. The limitation is that if you have an SDM-only lens then it won't work on anything older than a K10D with firmware 1.3. It can still be manually focused though.

The 21mm Limited will AF on your *istDS without problems.

Every few days we have a look and remove any invalid entries. I've just done that now, so the competition is down to three entries.

Please read the rules everyone who enters.

More off topic posts removed.

I think there's one in the Classified section of this forum at the moment.

There's more chance of a good MX that one of the electronic cameras, in some ways. They are sturdy, well made SLRs that are entirely manual in operation. They will work without batteries, which are only needed for the meter.

Try and find a little used one that has had a careful amateur owner, but many are stored incorrectly with the shutter cocked. This will weaken the springs after some time and lead to slow shutter speeds. So an overhaul may be needed. Store a manual shutter uncocked if possible.

A K1000 is not so nice, but is essentially the same spec and was made for longer, so more recent examples may be possible.

In all cases, replacement of foam seals may well be required. 1970s foam becomes dry and fragments or becomes sticky and gets everywhere. It's not difficult to replace or have replaced.

Off topic posts removed. Please let people have their ads free from other meanderings. If you want to comment, it needs to be relevant to the buying/selling process or it may well be removed.

Both the 55-300mm and the 18-135mm lenses are punching far above their weight. The 55-300mm is the best option in this spec bracket without a doubt. The 18-135mm I fell in love with when I tested it for EPZ. Not the highest technical performance, but a really gritty, sharp and contrasty lens that produces great visual results.

I'm a big fan of compact kit. It makes exploring easier if the burden is less.

A minimalist kit is the ideal, but the details are really very personal. Primes? Zooms? Tending to wide angles or telephotos? Macro? I. Not sure my choices would be relevant to your needs. However, this is what I would go for: 12-24mm, 50mm f/1.8, 18-135mm, 100mm Macro, 55-300mm or 60-250mm.

I'm not leaping to the defence of Pentax, I'm stating my opinion, so it's also not necessary to assume anything else....

I was actually replying to the notion that the only thing the 31mm had as an advantage was its compact size, which I don't believe to be true.

I have tested and used the 31mm and it performs better technically than much more recent lenses. Ironically, I prefer some of the lenses that perform technically less well, so I'm not actually championing the 31mm at all. Give me the 43mm f/1.9 and the 70mm f/2.4 any day in preference.