Greg,
Since upgrading to 1.12 and the AF360 seems fantastic! I haven't tried all combinations and situations - but I've noticed that it doesn't "blip" on you and go underexposed (except once when testing on a very reflective/glass object, but I'll forgive it for that!).
Some other things seemed to change in 1.12 too. My SMC-F 50mm/1.7 used to be a good 0.5 stop overexposed, and now it's fine.

Without setting up some tests and comparing 1.12 to a previous version I can only give you this circumstantial evidence

My opinion - upgrade
(Use a fully charged battery set before upgrading, or better still batteries & mains adaptor).

Matt

Greg,
Well, I've been running some ad-hoc tests on v1.12+AF360. Seems to be fab
It got caught out on one very reflective subject in macro mode, but most of the style shots that didn't work seem ok! I've tried wireless, high speed sync, macro, bounce, manual metered and they are all fine. (Not to say there aren't situations where it won't work though )

I do have the Metz 50MZ5 and SCA3702M. It's a beautiful, hunking piece of equipment. Massive is the word, and heavy!! Now it does have some great features, including the ability to scale down the flash output down to 1/256! Superb for really close macro work. But you miss out on the following options:
* No P-TTL, just TTL (why, I don't know!)
* Cannot control the flash exposure (this is only available in P-TTL)
* No High speed sync
* No wireless from the pop up flash

Personally, I find I'm going to use both! The AF360 is much easier to carry around, and with a Stofen Omnibounce produces a great light. Wireless is also very handy, and I try and use this a lot - stops that flat flash look The Metz I'll use for "events" where I need the brute force power!

Just some other interesting points (that don't appear in the manuals):
* Switch the *ist-D to M, and meter. This will give you a "non-flash" exposure for the shot. Make sure the aperture is at least f4 or f5.6. Then take a shot with the AF360. This uses P-TTL (you can tell this if you set trailing curtain sync and a slow shutter speed). Results are wonderfully natural for room shots
(I made the mistake of trying this with my f1.7 50mm and the shots blew out until I realised I needed a smaller aperture.)
* It appears the P-TTL gets more confused when you have a centered subject and space behind. The matrix metering tries to balance out the shot but can't because the flash can't light the "space". So it aims for an even exposure (which leads to an underexposed subject).

If you are taking shots in the same environment, I would strongly suggest using metered manual and P-TTL flash. I would get an exposure setting without flash, underexpose by a stop or two, and then let the AF360 do the rest. That way you'll maintain a compromise between the ambient lighting and the flash

When I get a moment I intend to work out the combination of flash compensation (on the AF360) plus exposure compensation (on the *ist-D). I reckon there's room for more control in using the two together (and in opposite directions, e.g. -1 on the AF360, +1 on the *ist-D)....

There'll be more to follow
Matt

Update...
I've just updated my *ist-D firmware to 1.12 (thought I'd tried it already, or maybe I'd dismissed it as they say the only changes were for 4Gb cards). But - I've noticed that I'm finding it much harder to make the AF360 go wrong. Whether that's my quirky imagination or not remains to be seen
Matt

Dave,
I've tried pretty much every mode to see if you can disable the P-TTL and get plain TTL. Fully manual mode does seem to be nearly right, although when I set trailing curtain sync on a 2 second exposure I still got two flashes! I'll have to experiment a bit more.
(When setting the aperture manually it'll only shoot wide open if on P or Tv and you set the aperture physically. Fortunately setting to M mode and dialling in the aperture with the thumb wheel still works... but then I'm not sure why P-TTL mode seems enabled when it doesn't make much sense.)
Matt

Dave,
Here are some replies...

First: Yes (see second answer too)

Second: Unless you switch the AF360 to HS (High speed) then the camera will use the "regular" sync speed, so 1/60s is what you'd expect.

Third: I have found the AF360 display "interesting" when it comes to focal length!! My SMC-FA 24-90 shows "24" to "58" on the display, which by my reckoning shows they've divided the focal length by 1.5 rather than multiplied it! Not sure if Pentax can fix it, but it does just seem to be the display rather the zoom head that's at fault.

Exposure: yes, there is an exposure problem. However, it is scene specific, so sometimes the AF360 is just great, other times it's underexposed horribly. One tip: manually set the aperture on the lens (if you can) and the *ist-D will be forced to do TTL metering, rather than P-TTL. This yields bright images that you would expect
(My hunch is that because the AF360 has to discharge a little for the preflash in P-TTL mode, it doesn't always have enough left for the main flash. Whether that's always the case, I don't know. If you shoot ISO200 at a near scene there's rarely a problem. You may find that using ISO400 will help... I'm still trying to pin it all down!)

Fourth: Tricky question! Hopefully I'll be putting together an article or two on the *ist-D & AF360 combination. In the meantime, my suggestion is to go to your local library. If you learn about general flash techniques, you can always apply them to the AF360.

Hope that helps!
Matt

The images are converted to B&W in-camera. Consequently there is no colour information left.

Depending on the complexity of the image, it is possible to hand colour in Photoshop. However, it takes a little time and quite some skill

Matt

Yes, these look like hot pixels.
A number of things contribute to them: a warm camera, hot-spots on the CCD, ISO setting, exposure time.

The usually occur at exactly the same pixel locations, and for me, usually at ISO1600 and definitely ISO3200. I think I have two or three that regular show their face. If you have a huge number and the camera is in warranty it might be worth trying to get a replacement (but check the replacement one first!).

There's not a great deal you can do with a JPG image, except use Photoshop's healing brush (or Elements 3). With a RAW file packages like Capture One LE does a great job of eliminating them.

Also, make sure you have noise reduction enabled on the custom menu. If this still fails, the best way is known as dark frame subtraction. You take your real shot, then immediately afterwards put the lens cap on and take exactly the same exposure. Then, in Photoshop you subtract the lens-cap-on image from the real image - gets rid of the common elements between the two.

Hope that sheds some light (excuse the pun!)
Matt

Definitely much better to do the Black & White conversion on the PC.
You will always get the best results by shooting in RAW mode.

There are many methods available.
My website: www.photon.me.uk has a few tutorials, and www.ephotozine.com has some too under the Techniques section.

Matt

Not sure if this is the SMC-F 70-210, but LCE Group have it for £39!
http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/item_details.php?second_hand_equipment_id=4264

I have the 70-210 and it is razor sharp and very contrasty.
Matt

George,
Yes, I think so. I had the Pentax manual tubes which meant that adjusting the aperture on the lens stopped it down. Everything was done manually, yes, like using an M series lens.
Matt