I use a Transcend 16GB SDHC without any problems in my K20D. (£20 from either My Memory, 7dayshop or Ebay)
It does sound like the camera just doesn't like the brand you're using.

Oh, I don't know. I'd be very tempted by a digital MX!
But an auto focus one would definitely sell better!
However... it would be an APS-C sensor so they'd have to put an aperture ring on the DA lenses to get the old feel back (or reintroduce some of the old FA series!)
Still, we can dream....

The 55-300 is a better lens, but if you want to travel light the 50-200 is tiny! It is about the same size as the standard zoom or maybe even a smidge smaller. Optically my 50-200 was great up to about 120-130mm then gradually eased down to good by the time you hit 200.
The 55-300 isn't a monster by any means but it is quite chunky so it depends what you're doing in the mountains as to wheather or not it will get in the way. It is better optically though.(at least my one is)
Tough decision though. The 50-200 is a great LITTLE travel lens but the 55-300 covers the same range and a quite a bit more and does it better.(IMHO) You're probably more confused than ever, now that I've just read through this again, sorry!

Not that i feel worthy to offer an opinion but I'll wade in with both feet anyway!
The third shot is hands down winner for me. The Bollards and the pipe lead the eye to that great sky.
The first one is odd. I quite like it but something just dosen't sit right with it for me. I think it's that the overhead gantry is a vertical line in the frame but the chimney tilts inwards.It looks a bit off balance to me. But what do I know. The second shot is much easier on my eyes because the perspective is more balanced. The chimney and the left of the building both converge nicely. Looks pretty damn sharp too!
Good shots though. I'm jealous, I miss my film 24mm's viewpoint since I went digital (all of two months ago!) I need to get a wide digital lens , and soon. Must buy more lottery tickets.....

We ll I'll just back up what the others said.
1) At least 600, but I tend to think of Battery life in terms of weeks rather than shots!I have a spare anyway and it takes abut 10 seconds to change.
2)In some modes it's already assigned to one of the jog wheels so literally a flick of the thumb or forefinger will change it. You can even keep your eye to the viewfinder while you do it as ISO speed is displayed there, along with pretty much everything else! Even using the slowest method (Fn button and up down left right wheel and menus) it takes no more than 5 seconds.
3) I've had no problems but I guess It depends on your individual eyesight.Thre are times when a split prism might be nice but it's by no means necessary.Eyepiece magnifiers and aftermarket screens are available, as stated in one of the earlier posts. One of the main reasons for going with Pentax is that I could still use my old ( and very lovely) Pentax film lenses.
4) No idea,don't have one.

Pros, where do I start.
You can set the camera up pretty much exactly as YOU want it. Nearly every function is customisable.
Astoishingly sharp pictures when I get it right.
I can use my lovely old glass.
I can buy very nice old glass for relatively little money given the quality but it's (mostly) manual focus.
It's better value for money than the Olympus. (I.M.H.O.)

Cons:
It will take ages to figure out what everything does and work my way throught the very thick manual. (I've had the camera nearly two months now and there are still functions I haven't played with. Which is a good thing I guess)
My lovely old wide angle 35mm primes aren't very wide at all any more

Tough comparison. Jessops were (are?) selling the Tamron for £60 and for that money it is a real bargain. It is really quite sharp up to just over 200mm then gets softer as you approach 300. It even has a macro function which is a bonus. If you aren't shooting high contrast edges you will be very happy with this lens. However if you do shoot high contrast edges, birds against the sky, tree silhouettes, ridge or roof lines even railings then the dreaded purple fringing appears. And it can be pretty bad with this lens! Some say it is correctable in software but it drove me nuts and after a very short time I traded up to the Pentax and it is in a different league. It is however three times the price I paid for the Tamron at Jessops. Only you can decide.( but i'd recommend the Pentax!)
Handholding at 300mm in anything less than bright sunshine is tough! It can be done but it isn't easy and a tripod is highly recommended! So at this time of year be prepared to shoot at higher ISO settings and get more noise or get a high proportion of blurred pictures until your technique improves. I've got better at it but there's still a long way to go! I'm considering getting a monopod so I can get more out of this lens without lugging a ruddy great tripod everywhere! But zoom back a bit and it is a much easier prospect to deal with.

I suppose "much" better is a very subjective term . But it is sharper faster and has less CA than the 12-24. Could I live with the 12-24? Probably could, if I'm honest, but I want sharper and faster, especially if I'm paying £400+. Then it's a "buy it once, buy it right" deal for me.
If we all made do there wouldn't be any new toys like the DA* zooms. Why bother with the 60-250 when there's a perfectly good 55-300 available?
I must admit that being new to this digital lark, I hadn't considered stitching two photo's together. I'd always thought of that as a slightly dodgy point and shoot camera sort of thing, where the joins don't quite line up. I confess I haven't even delved very deeply into the free Pentax software yet as my mindset is still in the "do it in camera" camp. I will have to investigate just how good these photo software packages can be. I don't fancy spending £600 on photoshop though (or the hours to learn how to drive it!)so what packages would you guys recommend? Where should a digital novice start.Or is the Pentax/silkypix all I'll need for a while? I suppose I'll want lens correction tools soon enough as I can't see me buying too much top end glass....

I disagree that it is pointless lens. It's already selling well in Nikon and Canon mounts and both companies have their own lenses in tht range.
By keeping the zoom range short the optical quality can be kept high, it is already regarded as being much better than the Tokina 12-24 f4 ( sound familiar ?) and even bests the Nikon equivalent. It seems to me that as Hoya own Tokina and Pentax they are missing a trick by not bringing the lenses out in a pentax mount first. Wouldn't hurt Pentax camera sales having more top quality lenses available, under either brand name ( and first!)
I'm after a very good WIDE lens.(The fixed 14 is limiting - and expensive). The 16-50 range is covered by several very good, fast lenses so stopping at 16 to keep the quality high isn't an issue for me, or ir seems many Canikon owners. Bring it on and fast I say.

Anyone heard anything about either a pentax mount for the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 or more likely a Pentax branded version, preferably weather sealed?
I can't wait to get into debt on this one..... (hope the missus isn't reading this)

Don't get the tamron. The purple fringing on high contrast edges will drive you nuts. It's a pretty good lens otherwise, for the £60 it cost me at Jessops.
However today , I did a bad thing, ( according to my wife...)I bought the Pentax 55-300 from those awfully nice people at SRS in Watford and it really is a little gem. Even though it was dark when I bought it, the few snaps I have taken with it have much better colour and is MUCH sharper at the long end than the Tamron. I was hoping to point it at the moon tonight for a play but it's cloudy here!
I haven't used the sigma but have a look herefor wise words from someone who has.
Well worth a browse through that site by the way....
Now I'll have to put the Tamron and DA 50-200 on ebay to pay for it