Yes, this can be a bit of a problem - I love landscapes and using wide-angle lenses but this is where we lose out.
A 28mm lens effectively becomes a 42mm lens, which in 35mm photography wouldn't really be considered wide-angle at all. The effective aperture is also reduced - great for Depth of Field but not so good for low light situations.
A cheap 50mm lens is likely to be pretty good but a cheap 24mm is almost certain to be optically poor, so a really good 'true' wide-angle for a Pentax DSLR is going to cost a pretty penny. Likewise, a full size (35mm) image sensor would be very costly and take the camera out of reach for most people.
Pentax's current range represents a very sensible compromise and users of older 35mm type lenses are catered for and do at least benefit from the image sensor concentrating on the area for the lens' surface that delivers the highest resolution (image quality tends to drop off toward the edges).

We should also bear in mind that the *istD range is even good enough for most professional applications but 8, 12 and even 20 megapixels are really designed for the pros. - and they could certainly afford good wide-angle lenses!

Indeed, it can be useful but I've always thought that exposure data would be better

They're both AF cameras but you can switch to manual and use your existing lenses. You'll benefit chiefly from advanced metering but can also use AF lenses should you find a bargain or two.
The MZ-M is fully manual and pretty good but not as advanced as the 3 and 5.
AF lenses can be focused manually but manual lenses are designed better for this so if you prefer to shoot manually, then a manual lens on an AF body set to manual is ideal and you'll also get focus confirmation in the viewfinder + an audible beep if you want it.

When you said "pk fit lenses", did you mean K or KA (as you would normally have with a program camera such as the P30)?

I've no experience of the MZ50 but it's reasonably up to date and I'd be suprised if it struggled that much.
Multi-point AF is overrated and many users elect to switch to single/spot focusing mode.

My old but thoroughly reliable SFX can't match modern predictive focus cameras, being as it has the older 'continuous' mode, but focuses pretty well in low light - might be worth getting yours checked out against a similar model!

John, I've just carried out a very simple comparison test between my F35-135 (3.5/4.5) and my FA28-105 (4/5.6) - original power zoom model.
I shot a sunlit flower at 35mm, 50mm and 85mm respectively with both lenses and I'm pleased with all the results (camera on auto).
The F lens is just a little softer, as confirmed by official MTF tests, but there's not a great deal in it.
What was really noticeable however was the ease of use of the FA lens, it really snapped into focus quickly and allowed macro shots at each FL with ease - you have to turn the zoom ring beyond 135mm to enter the macro range on the F lens!
Furthermore, the F lens hunted considerably and I had to alter the camera to subject distance slightly for each focal length.
With both lenses at the same FL without macro, the results were perfectly acceptable with the edge just going to the FA.

I've always been impressed with the FA on my Z1-P and I think it'll probably spend the most time on my *istDL - a terrific combination

You're absolutely right George, F and FA lenses would be the preferred choice but A series have all the 'essentials' and manual focusing can be a great way to get more 'feel' for your photography.
As good as it is, I don't think the AF on my *istDL is quite as crisp and positive as my Z1-P but perhaps that where the new 'digital' lenses perform better.

Things have moved on somewhat but I think most of us would agree that the majority of M and A series lenses are simply gorgeous!

Good point George but for general shots, choosing f8 gets the best out of most lenses.
A and F lenses certainly seem fully compatible, as do the Tamrons with KA mounts (although the camera has no idea whether the lens is a wide angle or a telephoto - watch your shutter speeds!)

I'd just like to reinforce statements made by John, George, Matt and others re. the quality of older A, F and indeed Tamron adaptall 2 manual lenses on Pentax DSLRs.

I picked up my *istDL body this morning and I'm very impressed indeed, the results (JPEG Best) with the lenses I've tried so far - A 50 f1.4, F 50 f1.7 and Tamron AD2 135 f2.5 are absolutely stunning.
Results from my F35-135 f3.5/4.5 are noticeably a little softer but good nevertheless, however with this lens in particular, the camera seems a little over eager with the auto flash despite the subject being well beyond it's range.
The only lens I have that can deliver a real wide-angle is a Tamron 24 f2.5 and again, the results are superb.

I've a few other lenses to try but I think my findings so far more than support the advice we give to go for second-hand quality optics esp. SMC primes!

Looking forward to having a go with RAW images, once I'm comfortable with the various camera settings etc.

BTW, switched off wide focus area within the first 5mins

Film is still very much alive and I hope it stays that way but in terms of quality results, digital is catching up fast.
Digital is undoubtedly more convenient and manoeuverable and you have to appreciate that 90% of photographs are inevitably 'snapshots' - taken spontaneously on holidays and at parties.
As such, the amateur photographer is happy with nothing more than standard sized 6x4 or 7x5 enprints and only rarely orders an enlargement. The average 3MP compact is capable of perfectly acceptable results at these sizes and with a little simple image manipulation, decent prints up to A4 size can be achieved at home.
With 6MP+ DSLRs, the advantages are obvious - even for professionals but I doubt if many will completely give up film, at least for the next few years!

BTW, no apology needed - I'm used to it

Yes, I'm afraid so - only today, I received a letter with my full name prefixed with 'Mrs.'