I have two flashes, both of which I'd recommend. If you want auto, the Metz 44 is well built, works as expected and can be used in manual mode on various power settings if required. It lacks a bit of power but for normal bounce flash in a home with normal-height ceilings it's fine. On a K5 it will be better than on my K200D because you'll be able to boost the ISO without degrading the IQ much, having said that, when I use a bounced flash at home I almost always have ISO 100 set.

If you're prepared to go manual, which is in fact very easy with bounce flash, then you can save a lot of money by buying a Yongnuo flash. Mine is a basic model (YN 560) but extremely well built (better than the Metz) and also more powerful. You can buy them for around 50 quid I think, on Amazon. It doesn't seem to like lithium AAs though, which is odd.

The 35/2.4 gets a lot of good press and reviews because it's cheap and doesn't perform badly, but much of this is not really deserved. However, the DA 35/2.8 limited is head-and-shoulders above it in terms of IQ, build quality and pleasure of use. The limited is sharper with much better colour and contrast and despite the f/ numbers, the 2.4 only lets in 25% more light than the 2.8 when wide open, not the 50% that the f/ number would lead us to believe (yes, I've checked this).

If you're looking at old glass, the SMC Takumar 35/3.5 is superb but tricky to use due to it's lower speed (hard to focus) and small size. The M 35mm f/2 is also very good (optically superior to the DAL 35/2.4) but rarer and so will probably cost as much as the DAL.

Since I moved to Spain I have ceased believing in RIP-off Britain. Prices for electronic and photographic goods on the continent are much higher than they are in the UK, harder to find (especially Pentax) and with worse customer support.

I suppose if you compare prices to the US, they are still much higher.

The 50/1.7 A and M are both fantastic lenses. The M version is the best cheap K-mount lens available for Pentax. The only 50-ish lens I like as much is the SMC Tak 55mm f/2, but then you're dealing with the added complication of the screw-mount.

The M 85mm f/2 lens is also very good, though wide open it's not too sharp and has very bad blue fringing. At f/2.8 it's much better and by f/4 is absolutely superb in every way - sharpness, colour contrast. It's also compact and the cheapest Pentax 85mm lens you're likely to find, though still not particularly common.

I like the US forums, but not their reviews. I'm sure that the K3 is a very solid and capable camera, even if the IQ has gone down a bit compared to the K5s, but I really can't stand PentaxForum's reviews of anything. They make it very clear that the outcome of the review was decided before the equipment even arrived, dismiss major problems as minor ones, and are very poorly written.

DPR review photos are always poor, the most boring photos you could imagine. The last ones I looked at were for the Sony A7. If anyone tells you that with FF all your photos will shine compared to APS-C, then tell them to have a look at the A7 sample photos on DPR.

If you like doing things manually (as I do) then an AF lens is no substitute for a manual one. I enjoy using manual lenses and have more manual 50mm lenses than I care to count. However, AF is very useful sometimes so I have an FA 50/1.7, which also produces great results. The FA doesn't provide the pleasure in use of the manual lenses though.

For me, it's worth having both options available, and I'd also say I prefer the Pentax f/1.7 and f/1.8 standard lenses to the f/1.4 ones, I find they produce better results (the SMC Takumar 55 f/1.8 or F/2 being probably the best). You could consider the DA 50mm f/1.8, which I think you can get for around 120GBP currently, and this would be a cheaper option.

I'd like to see this lens at anything other than 30mm, to see how the length changes. The hood would be nice to see too, as ltd series hoods are often oddities.

Strange that the may still shows the DA 14/2.8, which as far as I'm aware was quietly discontinued about a year ago.

I also notice that there's no non-WR version of the 55-300 any more.

It's a shame they decided to make it DC and WR, that will have driven up the price considerably. Unlike many, I like the concept of this lens, but I'd never pay that kind of money for it.