They did on my screen Philip, and the problem with the images you've posted is that now they've been re-processed and re-compressed for the web.

Anyway, it's not a matter of anyone being convinced by you or I, they should download the high resolution images for themselves, judge for themselves also the parameters clearly laid out and see if it makes a difference for them.

That may help them decide which model to go for, which was my aim when thinking about how best to go about the two reviews. I don't mind which model they go for, that's an individual choice.

Off topic posts removed.

Unfortunately those shots were made in the EPZ studio and I don't know what controls were in place for that - they are intended only for colour balance comparison. They do look different, in fact the II image is sharper than the IIs. but that is beyond my control.

The test images that I did shoot were all using the same technique, so the best place to look is all the tangled branches on some of the shots. I've explained in the test text what controls were in place. I've even told you where they were shot, so anyone who wants to can repeat it for themselves.

I'll just repeat that the purpose of the exercise was to provide the means, as far as possible, for you to compare and decide for yourself. Obviously I have my own conclusions and have given those and that will guide my own buying choice. Whether you agree or not is not the point.

I wrote a brief article covering the basics of the MZ range in this issue of Pentax User:

https://www.pentaxuser.com/magazine/winter-issue-4-2010-44

I may even have a few hard copies left, but in any event you can download the PDF version.

At the price, the Q fish-eye gives a very low cost entry into fish-eye photography. It has its uses, not on every shot, but enough to make it a useful addition to the camera bag.

It's interesting that they say f/13 as Pentax suggest f/8 is the turning point. I guess you'll find out when you get the camera.

I'll look forward to hearing how you like your K-5 IIs Matt.

Yes, it's because you're on Pentax User! A site dedicated to help Pentax Users with their Pentax photography.

Funnily enough, Olympus User is full of people who use Olympus!

I'm not sure if there's any contradiction, but the point I was making was that for a single type of consumer there's a law of diminishing returns and a saturation point. Beyond that, new products are needed that will move the saturation point back. It just gets more difficult for manufacturers to achieve this with a fixed clientele. So they have to expand the user base as well.

When we bought ther SP1000 it was camera club members/enthusiasts who were the main market and many likely had darkrooms as well. That's a specialised market. Camera manufacturers have managed to expand that user base quite extensiively since then.

The thing I don't like about digital photo frames is that you end up with a wire trailing to a transformer. It makes what could be quite sleek rather untidy. Also, who stops and watches a slide show that they have no control over? Not many people I suspect.

Asking is fine. I'm not familiar with Picasa 3 so will someone who is offer a solution?