I've got that Ian, I'm just trying to find out why 3fps is better than 1.6fps or 7fps, specifically that is. One example of a situation would be helpful.

A fisheye is a type of design where there is no attempt to correct for barrel distortion. Coverage is either 180 degrees within the frame (circle in a black surround) or a "full frame fisheye" where the diagonal is 180 degrees or more. Some fisheye lenses cover 220 degrees, maybe others as well. full frame in this context means filling the format, whatever that might be, not in the usual sense of a DSLR of a particular format.

Fisheye focal length can vary from say 6mm to 16mm and of course it depends on format as well. The Q fisheye is 3.2mm.

Why does it make any difference wadna? I'm not yet clear why you would want a slower frame rate of around 3fps. I've no doubt there is a reason, but nobody has actually said more than "under some circumstances" so far. What circumstances and why?

It would be helpful to know.

There is another argument that fast frame rates of any kind merely allow us to randomly completely miss the essential moment anyway. Practice means the single shot can be more effective if timed correctly.

I'm not saying I personally subscribe to any of these theories, but I was just wondering.

I can see there may be images that don't qualify for the judging, but it's really up to everyone to read the very brief rules for the competition.

Greynolds999 is quite right, posters should be very careful to avoid being libellous on the web, be it on Twitter, here or anywhere else. They are not immune from prosecution, as some find out to their cost.

Please stick to the relevance to Pentax photographers.

The moral is usually behave properly and problems should be rare. I haven't looked at this video but there are plenty where photographers taunt and provoke security and it's very counter-productive.

I'm afraid you may have to wait until I buy one. EPZ have taken on permanent staff and don't seem to call much on freelances at the moment. No point paying someone to do something when you're already paying someone a salary to do the job.

However, I've never had a problem buying Pentax cameras. It's different now because a film camera could last a lifetime if you wanted it to. Upgrading was replacing as they all produce the same quality of result.

DSLRs are different in that image quality has steadily improved. The K-5 is good enough at this point so is unlikely to be replaced until we get a catastrophic failure or mishap. Then replacement would be another K-5. There's also the matter of sharing layout and accessories so putting a K30 in the mix may not be a logical step.

Apart from the low light noise performance and high ISO superiority of the K-5, the K20D also delivers quality which is absolutely fine and the K-r IMHO handles slightly better than any of them. No WR on the Kr though, which is a shame, as I need that feature.

I'm sure I'd be happy if we had two K30s, but we'd need them at the same time and there's no point for us at this juncture.

Amazon can be superb. There's just no variation from policy, so anything must be returned within 30 days. Otherwise I don't know, it might take a few phone calls.

Still, I've never had a problem and have always bought with confidence. When we got to our third Kindle all was fine again. In the meantime, Sue was issuing steam from both ears.....

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, but I don't subscribe to the theory that someone with no technical knowledge carries equal weight in assessing something new to someone who has technical knowledge. That's patently ridiculous.

Some see conspiracy in every dark corner, others realise that life is more complex than that. Usually people are just making a living the best way they can.

Some of the bias you mention may well exist, but very often it's simply that we don't like what people are saying. If I say the K-5 is better than the Nikon D7000 is that bias, or just my conclusion? If someone else says the Nikon D7000 is preferable to the K-5 is that bias or just their conclusion?

Using you logic I could conclude that your post is biased and therefore need not be taken note of. On the other hand, you might well mean it and believe it.

On that logic, why take no notice of reviews but take notice of everyone else's random preconceptions, often made before something has been tried.

I've said it before, but I've done reviews and there is no pressure whatsoever to reach any particular conclusion. It would be counter-productive to the reputation of a site. In fact, items are just sent, review is submitted and that's that. Oh yes, invoice is submitted and duly paid as well.

Conspiracies can be seen everywhere if we have a mind to.

Looking at the SRS site, the 50mm f1.8 is still unpriced. Some lenses seem to have been reduced and the 50mm f1.4, still available it seems despite being thought discontinued for years now, is £289. Not bad.

For preference I think I'd go for the 40mm f2.8 Limited or 43mm f1.9 Limited if funds allowed.