That's the one Mark! It's that 77 zone sensor it does not play well and not just for the flash metering either, it wanted changing and now thankfully has been,
Still loved my K5/5IIs's by the way, not flaming them at all.
Neil your over thinking? What you need is a workable file that you can manipulate later, would it be better to say that even when shot in Auto the K3 gives me more workable files in that there is less blocked up shadows and less burnt out highlights due to the meters accuracy than I ever got with the K5 shot manually? (The histogram tells lies too!) Which in turn for me means less mucking about with it to get the look I want and still have it look fairly natural and not like an HDR...
It Just helps my workflow and means less time spent in front of the PC for PP, unfortunately I'm soo damn bored at home this last few weeks recovering fro my foot surgery I almost wish I had a few more files to work on, Come back K5 all is forgiven...

Having seen the great shots you put out, I think you'd do pretty well with a box brownie mate but the K5IIs will suffice, as you know your environment for the out of a plane window stuff, I reckon you could dial in a decent user set up for it...

Unfortunately I found the K5's meter so inaccurate as to make it nigh on impossible, it's flakey, there I said it, It's unreliable there I said it!
When your prepared to go and spend six+ hrs in -8 to get shots as I do, (When both my legs work!)you have time to get it as near as you can,using manual and bracketing a lot, indeed you owe it to yourself for the bloody effort in most Cumbrian Winters! However it's not always the case and sometimes you can only get one frame, then in almost every way the K5 meter let me down, don't get me wrong it's no worse than say a D600, which just doesn't like any bright light in the frame and has the Focus point linked irreversibly to the metering sensor, they're all biased towards Portrait Photography, a travesty in my book. The D800 now, is a different kettle of banana's but not to be discussed here!
The K5's was just unreliable wheras the K3's is uncanny, chalk and cheese mate Chalk and Cheese...

Anyway all irrelevant because Aliengrove is buying a K5IIs

P.S. Smeggy I'm not the one saying you are biased against the K3, I actually think you'd quite like one but you really need a Nikon DF having shot one the other day, I would say even for your purposes it's just about ISO-less but I'm not allowed to discuss that here.
How do you think a K3s would be with say a 12Mp sensor devoted to hi Speed and High ISO? We can discuss that...

The K30 is a real winner, no doubt, despite looking like a Nike Traning shoe!
Personally I feel that being able to print bigger with the same/similar (For you Smeggy!) amount of noise is a win but I'd agree that the Bayer arrayed APSC Sensor has hit a buffer, will the next generation employ the same tech, who knows, something will come along and make what we have now look daft, just not this iteration. Because of the improvements in the the body mechanics it is easier for me at least to get better photographs but remember I print and as big as I can, it's personal to everyone. I wanted a K5IIs back for a second body (Before the other half lost her job again, third time in two years!:shock but I have realised there is no going back for me and will await the inevitable K60 with tech watered/filtered down from the K3 for my second shooter and for better times to allow it. This year I'll be lucky to afford the 1.4 convertor, looks like my copy of the long zoom will be permanently on ice, so I really hope it's crap and weighs a ton everybody!
I may have to add bitter to my list of ailments but I feel that way at the moment...

Ha looking at your classified had me wondering what you were using instead of the 16-50, question answered!

Anyone got a spare one?
Also I did put in a request early last year for a polariser widget hatch thingy for the 50-135mm hood, now someone had one and I kinda forgot about it, so I guess I should get it now if it's still available...

20-40 Has appeal but it's not really a practical focal length range is it? Or is it? When I look at my Landscapes over 80% could have been taken with that lens...

I'm currently saving for the 1.4 convertor but if the zoom comes first all bets are off!

I think so yes!
Erm lacks a teeny bit of micro contrast compared to the 15mm F4 Ltd but thats it, Any faults are the easily corrected ones in lightroom (Caveat, if you have it!) IE: a bit of chromatics and a slightly wavy distortion pattern. Where it scores is sharpness across the frame it's really very very good, and I should know I've had a few, including the Nikon 14-24 F2.8 and I'd put it right up there without hesitation.
(List: 16-35 Sony/Zeiss, a beauty, 16-35 Canon, 17-40 Canon, 17-35 Nikon, 16-35 Nikon, pentax 12-24mm, Sigma 8-16x3, 2x pentax and 1x Nikon, Sigma 12-24 HSMII) Not exhaustive list but off the top of my head, the outstanding ones are the Sigma 8-16, the Nikon 14-24 and the Sony Zeiss 16-35 but right in the mix I'd put the Pentax 12-24, it just does everything sooo well...

https://www.pentaxuser.com/review/pentax-smc-p-da-12-24mm-f-4-0-ed-al-lens-revie...

I want one, despite having my Sigma 8-16mm which I love, I miss having this lens in my bag, I need to get it again I think, it just works... There's one in my local camera shop and I keep popping in to see if it's still there Bonkers!