Ray,
I don't think you'll get the K10D before the 9th:
https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2825

Matt

Having read it all, I agree with you George.

Sorry for linking

One day I'll give it a whirl with my brother-in-law's *ist-DL... but I'd rather try it with a K10D

Matt

Here's a document:
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh/P-TTL_Vs_TTL.html
and
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh/K100D/RiceHighs_Pentax_K100D_Full_Review.html#P-TTL_Exposure_Accuracy

Worth the read (even if it is extremely "picky" in parts ). I forgot that for TTL flash you require a sensor built in to the body that reads the ambient light reflected off the film. In a CCD DSLR, the reflected light reading isn't necessarily such an accurate method - it's better on matte film.

So, it looks like all the DSLR bodies are now P-TTL (or plain old "A" or "M".

HTH,
Matt

Just found this link:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BOUNCE-ZOOM-TTL-FLASH-GRIP-for-PENTAX-fits-ist-D-DS_W0QQit...

Which suggests that the DL/DL2/DS2 don't support TTL at all
You can use "A" or "M" modes though.

Still looking for more evidence...

Matt

Ray,
The manual that I saw on the K10D only mentions the AF360 and AF540 flash guns...

However, from the wording I strongly suspect they just simplified their table in the manual rather than listing all the older flashes. They started this with the *ist-DL - and unfortunately I haven't had a chance to test a DL with my Metz 50MZ5.

None of the Metz modules offer P-TTL flash with Pentax bodies.

Judging by Pentax's stand on backward compatibility, I suspect that the K10D will work with all older Pentax flash guns (and therefore your Metz on TTL). But I'll have to rootle around and see if I can find some concrete evidence for you and get back
Matt

This has been covered extensively on other threads... will dig out the thread when I can.

I've been using Hoya Pro 1 slim UV0 filters. No discernable difference to the image at all. But they're not cheap...

...and can actually harm the lens. I've dropped two lenses with these filters on and they just splinter into a million pieces. The shattered glass actually causes more harm - actually counter productive.

If you have genuine Pentax lenses, then the coating is actually very hard and durable. So, as you may read here, many just go without a "protection" filter for their expensive lenses As I am now doing.

Matt

Hmmm,
Just got the low down on my two dud 28-70's - replacement internal elements cost more than a mint one is worth second hand. BER, in other words
Anyone need some spare parts?

Matt

Mac, I'm just finding out what the estimated repair cost would be (as I have two of 'em already). When I find out I'll let you know
It's a good lens, if it weren't for that problem!
Matt

ROFL @ George

Mac - no, George is referring to the second to last element's coating going all cloudy. It looks a bit like condensation, but it's permanent. I've had two 28-70s that have done this. One I managed to pull apart and scratch the resultant gunk off (fingernail and Eclipse solution) - it's usable, but probably not much better than a Sigma now

Matt

Mac,
You assume correctly
Pentax compatibility is probably the best there is
Though often the AF lenses require less rotation to focus, and the SMC-F have piddly little focus rings.

Don't forget that wide angle lenses will have greate DoF too so focussing is less critical - but you knew that already

HTH!
Matt