If this is an important shoot, then that's not the place to be experimenting with something you are unfamiliar with.

I would stick with your JPEG files and perfect your technique there rather than going into unknown territory that you say you don't fancy doing anyway.

One of the things that would concern me with the thin CSCs is the strength of the lens mount. There's nowhere for seriously solid support.

The K-01 looks much better in this respect and I'd expect it to withstand more leverage before damage ocurred. Not that I stress my camera mounts, but heavy telephoto lenses could be a risk.

Your link isn't working.

I'm just back in and it's all been done. When there are spam messages, it's best just to leave it to us to tidy it up. It won't be long before one of us picks it up and it saves multiple reports and messages. Of course if it doesn't get picked up, then do please let us know.

It's also very helpful if we resist the temptation to quote spam in a post, because then that needs removing as well as the spam....

The genuine Pentax Adapter K should be as smooth as silk, as we should expect.

You attach it to a lens and then bayonet the whole into place. Then screw thread lenses can easily be removed and replaced. Think of it as converting a K body to an M42 screw thread one, temporarily.

To eventually remove the adapter from the camera, operate the catch on the adapter to release it, rotate and it should drop out easily into the palm of your hand.

Size is relative. I was looking at a friend's Nikon D700 the other day, and apart from incredibly slow focusing, it was ludicrously heavy. I wouldn't even contemplate it. Yesterday we used our K-5s all day, shooting a wedding, and they were quick, light, resposive and even under disco lights snapped into focus almost all the time. Fantastic, and the whole kit we carried we could comfortably carry all day.

Against that thought as a backdrop, any mirrorless camera that's less bulky than something not at all bulky has to be fine. No need for adapters, no messing about with different lens ranges, but a viable and yes, more compact alternative to the DSLR range. Also, something that is what most compact cameras are not, and that is the same quality level as the DSLR range.

If anyone wants something more compact than that they are into different territory and there are plenty of alternatives on the market. I still maintain though that unless you can fit a camera in a pocket then after that the actual bulk reduces in importance (up to a point) as we need a camera bag to carry it anyway.

It just comes down to using catch in focus in the way intended, which is without risk and works.

This really means manual focus lenses, or at least one with an AF/MF switch.

Under these circumstances, the shutter will only release when the green hexagon steadies and confirms focus, so if you move the focusing ring from out of focus into focus, when you reach that point the shutter will fire. Conversly, this will also happen if something moving moves into a point the lens is focused on, hence the application of the technique to moving objects.

You need to have a manual focus lens, or a lens switched to manual focus, and the camera set to AF. You prefocus and lock the focus on a particular point and when that point becomes in focus the shutter will fire, providing full pressure has been kept on the shutter release.

The AF motor running indicates you have the AF system/lens combination active which isn't the right way to do it.

Posts removed in error replaced.

But can you speak for the majority of consumers? That's a pretty wide claim....: