If you're using auto focus detection, check which focus point you have selected in-camera I suspect it's not centre

I've found the threads, link, link, plus a link to an article on the same topic, link.

Good luck with your choice.

I'm sure I've seen threads here that suggest that whilst there are some benefits in upgrading from '10' to '20' it's not really worth while.

Better perhaps '10' to K7?

The GX10 is still a nice camera.

Try turning Shake Reduction off. It's the only thing I can think of that is likely to be making a noise such as you describe, other than the AF mechanism.

Could it be that the lens is falsely reporting 1.2 when it's actually at 2.8? ie at 2.8 it could actually be 4 or 5.6, hence the brighter image at '1.2'?

I've used White Vinegar. Works a treat! Make sure you 'wash' the vinegar away when you've finished - I used cotton wool swabs and water.

If you can actually remove the affected parts from the winder, just leave them to soak in the vinegar; the battery deposits just dissolve away!

Always worth looking, plus if this is of interest maybe they'll post it to you?

If anyone's interested it's the Purley Way store in South London. Just one lens I think.

I'm assuming you are planning to convert film (negs) to digital? If so, why not look around for recommendations for a film processor who can do it as part of the service? I'm sure there will be members here who can point you in the right direction.

I have a similar scanner to the one you've linked to. It's great when you have a lot of 'legacy' negs and slides and just want to move them to digital storage, but unless you're going to get heavily involved in pp the quality is, at best, 'ok', and it's pretty time consuming!

I'm resurrecting this thread with some information from the NT themselves regarding photograpy following an email exchange between me/'them'. Hope it helps

Initial response;

"We freely welcome amateur photography out of doors at our properties as we know that this can, for many people, really add a lot to the pleasure of their visit.

We understand that photography by visitors indoors can also enhance their enjoyment even further and we do now happily allow it in general, as long as it does not unduly affect other visitors. That said, it sometimes needs to be limited because of particular circumstances and it is therefore in practice ultimately at the discretion of individual property/general managers.

Such limitations usually come into play to ensure that we can maintain the enjoyment of visitors not using cameras. For example the noise, especially from digital, cameras can interfere with the experience of others. The use of flash photography can also dazzle other people in the room. So we feel flash photography is generally best not used.

Some of our historic houses, or parts of them, are not really suitable for amateur photography especially where the taking of photos in restricted spaces can lead to congestion of visitor routes. The use of tripods is discouraged as well because they can cause a trip hazard or otherwise inconvenience visitors.

At some properties there are restrictions on indoor photography because of copyright issues - or there is a requirement for further permissions in respect of certain collections, notably where specific items or exhibits are not owned by us. Also photographic images provide us with a certain amount of income (which is very important to a charity like us) so we do not allow photography for a commercial purpose without specific authorisation - to protect that source of funds.

My best advice would be to contact the property to make certain that photographs can be taken of what you want to picture or to organise a special “out of hours” arrangement, if this is at all possible."

Then this after I pressed them on how they would/could determine the amateur status of a photographer other than an assumption based on his/her kit;

"Successfully distinguishing between “snappers”, amateur photographers, “serious” amateur photographers, photographers who sell some of their work as a sideline, and fulltime commercial photographers is fraught with risk. A photographers status is therefore simply distinguished by what the photographer claims to be.

I do hope that you will make use of and enjoy the new arrangements for indoor, as well as outdoor, photography."