I agree - noise reduction in recent versions of LR is good enough that I stopped bothering with Topaz; really no need.

To me, the Df is also bloated both in price and size. If Pentax ever go down the "digital MX" route I hope they learn rather more from the Sony A7 than they do from Nikon.

The MX-1 produces the nicest images I've had from any digital compact camera, and its build quality and general handling are excellent in my view - no issues with the buttons and I'm 6'4" with hands in proportion!....

The screen is actually pretty good even in strong lighting conditions, and the fact that it is articulated can be very helpful. I don't really miss the viewfinder even though I would never use the rear LCD to compose an image on a camera that does have an OVF!

Image quality at lower ISOs is very good, and given how fast the lens is, you don't often have to up the ISO to levels where it degrades badly... at lower ISOs, I think you'll find it more than a match for the K100D. The latter will pull away from about ISO 640 onwards, but you don't buy compacts for that....

I find the camera works particularly well in a small pouch - especially the Pentax Billingham one which came for free from SRS - and I have a wrist strap (Gordy's leather one) attached rather than the neck strap. This really helps to give very secure handling.

By the way, I already think they've got down to an acceptable price where they offer excellent value.... Oh, and mine is black, which I prefer marginally to the silver, but they both look good.

Cheers,

Jon

The main difference in specification is between the K-500 and the other two. The K-500 is not weather sealed and does not have illuminated autofocus points in the viewfinder. For many, the latter is the more important omission. There may be some subtle tweaks to image processing compared but the K-50 and K-30 are essentially very similar cameras in different bodies. If you can find the K-30 cheap as an end of line deal, that makes it worth snapping up while you can.

Unless you plan on mainly being a prime lens shooter, I think I`d suggest you upgrade your zooms first. You don`t say who made them but I`d be surprised if the 28-200 was much of a performer on the K-3 and the same may well be true of the 28-80. Neither give you wide angle on APSC. I`d suggest you buy the body with a modern zoom, probably the 18-135 (equiv to your 28-200), and then supplement with one or two primes with many good recommendations in this thread. I`d start either at around 30-35mm ("standard") or buy a nifty fifty, which will be rather good for portraits on a crop sensor.

Cheers,

Jon

Lens provisionally sold. Cheers, Jon

Hi Neil - I've sent you a message if you check in the top right corner of this page.

Best,

Jon

Agree Steve - I moved from K-5 to K-5IIs and the difference is much more marked than I expected. It's faster and more confident (the AF for the K-5II is a definite improvement) and there is a noticeable difference to image quality. It was more of an upgrade than I thought it would be.

Jon

As per another thread, Tamron 70-300 is superb value at the price SRS are selling them for. But my 55-300 in the classifieds here is even better!

Lens sold and payment received. Thanks for looking, Jon