That shouldn't be possible Hyram, so unless there's been a glitch in the space-time continuum you've imagined it.

I have an AOCo marked case for the 105mm lens on eBay at the moment and the lining of that is green. I also have a much later case marked Asahi Pentax and that is lined with red, plus having a very M-series style foam lining at the bottom.

It may not be consistent though and it's not the sort of detail that is well documented. I've never kept many hard leather cases and they are not very good to house lenses in. Fungus is the enemy and leather cases encourage it.

I think it depends, really. On Sunday it was a bright, sunny day and I was quite happily out and about using the Q. A DSLR would have been easier, but that's probably to be expected.

It worked well enough is what I can tell you, but someone else might find it intolerable. So try before you buy if you're in doubt.

I think in one way we are always being a little unfair if we draw conclusions without having tried something, although sometimes reasonable deductions can be made.

The Q produces some nice quality and I'm getting better with mine as I go along. It's got a middling function for me and this puts it above the always-in-the-pocket very compact W90 but below the K20D and K-5 DSLRs that we currently use.

Every camera we have has a different ethos and a different application.

The W90 is tough, waterproof and very compact. I will always have at least that with me, just in case. I may not be anticipating any photography in this scenario, but I can pull good enough quality out of it for anything interesting that crops up.

The Q id for trips where a camera bag is not possible, for whatever reason. Photography is likely, so it's my best option under these circumstances. Quality level is more than satisfactory.

If I can take a camera bag then it's my Billingham Hadley Pro and a small DSLR kit. At least the 18-135mm, 55-300mm and 100mm Macro.

Enthusiasm can rub off on people, so I guess I have converted a few, or if not converted then pointed them from the start into the Pentax direction.

However, it doesn't really matter what marque we use, as long as it suits our style. The technical case for using Pentax is pretty clear - great colour, low noise, excellent lenses, superlative backwards compatitbility....great ergonomics.

The last point is subjective. There are a number of interesting features to Pentax design and it is, I think, elegant in its simplicity. The QuickShift feature, having the on/off button in the right place, compact designs, etc.

I don't want to pick holes in other makes, but sometimes I find their solution to technical issues to be quite "clunky" by comparison. It may suit other photographers very well though, and if that's the case then that's fine as well.

There's a theory that the "native ISO" gives optimum results and in the case of Pentax I understand that it's ISO200.

In practice, newer models give very similar performance at ISO400 and are very usable at much higher values. Noise always increses to some degree as we increase the ISO value. The K-5 is especially good in this respect.

e-mail address removed to prevent you being spammed. Please use PM, much safer.

Thinking about the discrepancy of numbers logged in, at the moment I find a variance of two, not one. Very often it's a measure of "active users within the last five minutes" with forums, so that may have more to do with it than anonymous users.

A thought that hopefully lives up to the ethos of this particular thread!

That just might be someone concealing their online status....I haven't ever bothered counting, but one day when there's only a small number that I can count to I will do so.

I'm not sure either how many characters are needed, but certainly two are not enough. It's unfortunate because "K-5" is an obvious choice as a search, and it doesn't work. "Pentax K-5" will work.

I understand it's on the possible upgrade list for future consideration.