The part of the display that shows remaining images on a card has only 3 characters. Depending on the size of card and the selected image quality, you can easily exceed the maximum displayable figure of 999.

That is to be expected. All RAW images have had no processing applied. You will almost always need to apply some sharpening to them during PP.

This can usually be applied at the import stage and may only require slight modification.

Don't forget also that an out-of-camera JPG image has only 8 bit colour depth compared to a RAW's 12 bit (I think, maybe it's 14 or more). In any event, there is much more detail to be recovered from a RAW file than a JPG.

Just forward the email in its entirety to [email protected] if it purports to have come from ebay, or [email protected] for Paypal spam mail.

Don't add anything to it or remove anything from it. By doing so, you may in some small way help ebay/paypal et al to fight back.

For that shot I would have used f8 or f11, focussed on the nearest building on the left hand shoreline (which is a pub or hotel IIRC), then recomposed and taken the shot.

BTW: There is a Sigma 105mm Macro for sale on here right now in the classified section.

Yes they are.

All Pentax DSLR's are newer than the AF360FGZ flash which is why there is no reference in the flash manual to them.

All Pentax DSLR's are P-TTL compatible, including your K200D.

I agree that f5.6 is too large an aperture unless you purposely want a narrow DOF. I generally use f11 - f22 and occasionally smaller but f16 is about the best.

What was the flash to subject distance then as I am still puzzled at the slow shutter speed?

EDIT: I just re-read your post. Change your exposure mode to Av and optionally add up to +0.7 EV compensation (that's what I use). If you had it at Tv you were forcing the slow shutter speed.

If that fails to produce a better image, switch to manual exposure mode and set the shutter to at least 1/250th and the aperture to f16.

NOTE: When using flash, shutter speed will make little difference to the exposure of this subject, it's the aperture setting that governs the exposure.

All and every email I receive claiming to be from ebay or paypal gets forwarded to [email protected] or [email protected] where they are either verified as genuine or not.

Can I suggest that you do the same because if they don't know the extent of these scams they can't do much about them.

Good composition and one of my favourite subjects.

Some observations:-

At ISO 200 and f16, I'm surprised you only got 1/20th sec shutter speed, especially as the flash did fire.

Can you elaborate on your flash please? Was it the built-in flash? If not, did you use a diffuser?

Did you use a tripod, and was SR on or off?

The slow shutter speed has contributed some camera shake I think which is why it doesn't appear tack sharp. I'm guessing that as the lens used is a Sigma, and the focal length is 105mm, that the lens is the Sigma 105mm Macro which I believe (I know) with better lighting, can produce stunning results.

Have a look at these for comparison. 1, 2, 3 & 6 are with Sigma 180mm Macro, 4 & 5 with SMCP-FA 100mm Macro. With better lighting, you should be able to get similar results.

I had seen that site Jonathan, but not the page you linked to. Thanks for that.

Certainly the body shape is very similar even if the markings are not identical. The eye positions are very similar too.

I'm pretty sure they are relatively harmless to humans and if they do bite, the venom is weak. That said, I'm not inviting him in for tea, neither will I offer him my hand in friendship. I am quite happy to leave him where he is, outside, and he can eat as many crickets as he can catch.