FF compacts are few and far between. Sony does one with a 35mm f/2 lens but I think it's a little long in the tooth (for a digital) these days. The best suggestion I can make is an upgrade to the X100V, which has been shown to have a considerably improved lens when compared to the older versions of the X100. It's APS-C but looks to me like it's pretty much perfect in every way (except price!).

The DA 70mm is a superb lens which I'm sure you'll enjoy a lot. I've recently taken my SMC version out for some use after a long period of neglect.

I was thinking that, other than the kit zooms, all the Pentax lenses I've ever bought new are my three AF 35mms: the DA Limited, the 35/2.4 and the new HD FA 35/2. The first was from SRS and the other two irresistible offers from Amazon.

I have lots of lenses and almost all of them have been bought used.

As for demand going down, I love travelling and taking loads of pictures when I do, but I've probably been taking more pictures than ever since the quarantine started. It's due to having more time available for it. I suppose though, that demand from professionals has gone right down because they don't have gigs, aren't using their equipment and there aren't finding faults, new requirements or breaking things, all of which would drive demand.

A very nice series indeed - all of them work very well as B&W.

I'm guessing you're talking about SRS. I had a quick gander but didn't see anything that seemed like a great price.

I imagine that the coronavirus is having a huge impact on photographic equipment, it is for many other things.

These look very good. I have the K version but haven't used it much yet. I'd break it out but don't currently have it with me where I'm quarantined.

I know what you mean about flower pictures - they've always been a fall-back for when I don't have anything more interesting to photograph, and that applies now more than ever.

A good one will focus reliably and produce sharp photos at all focal lengths with the aperture wide open at f/2.8.

The 17-70mm f/4 is a step back. Dodgy in-lens focus motor (prone to failure) and a stop slower. There's very little you could do with it that you couldn't do with the Tamron.

There's nothing wrong with the Tamron. I had one for many years and didn't sell it until I found the Sigma of the same specs at a good price. The Sigma is no longer made for Pentax mount but you should be able to find one used or maybe still new. Having said that, it's optically no better than the Tamron, just better built and with an in-lens focus motor that's a lot quieter than the Tamron's screw-drive AF. It's significantly bigger and heavier though, the cost of the better build quality.

Other than that I'm not sure what you're after - maybe a nice fast prime? There are several excellent options at 35mm, a standard focal length on APS-C. The DA 35mm macro Limited is superb, great as an all-round lens with the added bonus of 1:1 macro. Overall it's the best standard prime for Pentax APS-C cameras. If you want something cheaper then there's the 35mm f/2.4 which is decent enough, though plasticky build. If you want a bit more speed, use film cameras or are considering a change to FF then there's the HD FA 35mm f/2 which is optically almost as good as the Limited while a bit faster though with poorer build quality. It's one of those lenses that plummets in price when special offers come around though, so don't buy at full price unless you're in a hurry.

Of all that my recommendation would be the Limited, since you've already got the Tamron to cover a wider focal length range. Remember - you're never bored when you've got a good macro lens: there's ALWAYS something you can photograph with it, especially at a standard focal length rather than telephoto. For landscapes it's superb too. Perhaps not the focal length many would choose but the image quality is faultless.

I'm not sure they quite understand the concept of a "sale"......

I got my HD for £248.58 from Amazon last year and I'd fully expect it to get close to that again in REAL sales in the future. SRS had it for only about 20 quid more.

I haven't used either the 100 or the 120 a huge amount, but the 100 has often left me with pictures I've felt were a bit "meh" (as they say), while the 120 hasn't. The 100 also suffers from comparison to the M 85mm f/2, which is definitely better as it produces images with a fantastic 3D feel to them that few lenses can match. The 120 doesn't suffer here so much as it doesn't get compared due to the difference in focal length.

I haven't used either of the lenses enough to give a more definitive explanation of what I do and don't like, it's very much a personal impression.

As far as reviews on the US site, the 100mm has 49 and the 120mm has only nine, which makes sense as a much less common lens, so the total score is less reliable. I'll add that the only use I have for that total score is dismissing, or not, a lens completely when I find one for sale and want to know if it's worth considering or not.