No it doesn't
(i.e. you are not missing 1.04 to 1.09!!)

Changes in the second decimal place are typically for bug fixes.
Changes in the first decimal place are typically for minor feature additions.
Changes in the integer part denote major change.



Matt

It's now listed on the Pentax.jp site
http://www.pentax.jp/english/support/digital/k-5_s.html

Looks like just GPS support then.
Matt

Hi Peter,
In answer to your questions:

1. As George says, the sliders, image style etc only apply to JPG. In fact, you can use it to your advantage. For example, you can set the picture to monochrome - and the embedded JPG that's stored inside the RAW file (and the separate JPG file if you are shooting RAW+JPG) will be monochrome. The RAW data will be completely untouched

2. RAW is completely unaffected by white balance. I generally use Auto WB, as the K-5 has very good auto white balance. Most often I'll use the K-5's settings directly in the RAW development software (Lightroom or Silkypix) but I can always override that in the software.

3.& 4. No, RAW isn't a waste of time Let's assume you have a perfectly exposed shot, with correct white balance - using out-of-the-box settings in the RAW software you'll probably see little difference. However, you have a lot more latitude in the RAW - for example you can use "Fill Light" to bring out much more detail from the shadows. As a practical example, I covered a friend's wedding in full sunlight with the K-5 in RAW. The dynamic range was massive and the embedded JPGs struggled to cope with both the shadows and highlights. However, in Lightroom I could tweak the settings to effectively compress the dynamic range and make everything less harsh. I didn't need fill in flash at all (Which saved my arms no end!)
You end up with much more scope for creative control of overall exposure - even when it was right in camera.

Additionally, with Lightroom I can use graduated adjustments which mean that I rarely have to use ND Grad filters anymore It's unbelievable what can be pulled out of the murky shadows in RAW

5. When shooting RAW it is irrelevant what the colour space is on the camera (at least on dSLRs - large format backs are sometimes a different matter!). The colour space (sRGB or AdobeRGB) only affects the embedded JPG. When you use your RAW conversion software you can decide which colour space to output to. This is handy... you can set the camera to sRGB, and use sRGB for 99% of your work within the PC. If you decide you need a wider colour gamut for an individual shot you just re-export to a wider one (like AdobeRGB or ProPhoto). Easy

Hope that helps!
Matt

FWIW, I've been using the 8Gb Samsung tough cards. So far, so good....

Just a couple of points worth throwing into the mix about the DA*50-135

1. Weather sealed. It's great using this in torrential rain, snow, etc

2. Very good manual focus. I know this isn't a substitute for fast AF, etc, but the ability to instantly switch to MF and override is great, and MF is a breeze with the wide focus ring.

But... sometimes I do find that 135mm is a bit on the short side Perhaps I should have the Tamron 70-200/2.8 as well

YMMV depending on your shooting style

Matt

"I'm off into the vile, poser filled land of lo---mo--gro--pheee"

Absolutely wonderful
Matt

Have fun!

Yes, I'd seen those
It's just such a shame though when the rest of the hood is perfectly fine! I'll probably just use this one without the cover...

PM sent for DA*16-50 (hahahaha - LBA strikes again! )

£60 is certainly steep! Especially given the cost of the 35/2.4!
Have PM'd with a good alternative

I bought a metal screw on hood for the 50/1.4. Think it's a Kood and works very, very well. Definitely more substantial than the cheapy-cheap stuff.


On a similar note, I have an 18-55 hood that's missing the polariser cover! Shame that the whole hood is so expensive, and you can't get just the cover (unless anyone wants to prove me wrong! )

Matt