I usually use manual focus lenses for landscape, and my preferred method for focusing (on a tripod) is Live View mode, using the magnification feature to 'zoom' in on the LCD screen, move the little square around onto an appropriate object (somewhere near hyperfocal distance), and fine tune focus on that point.

The screen display can usually give a good clear response to focus adjustments, and its obvious when you've got it nailed. But any electronic aid that could help would be a bonus surely. I'd certainly try to use it if I was getting a new K3, I think with this type of shooting technique it would work very well.

I'm less sure of its effectiveness handholding of course - all my handhold shots are taken using the viewfinder.

The focal plane type is clearly able to accommodate the faster speed, as some other DSLRs currently offer it, and from what has been said some earlier Pentax SLRs. Is there anything inherent to the current Pentax system specifically that rules out anything above 180th, or (as alluded to above by ChrisA) is it just difficult to do or too costly?

The consensus forming here appears to be that 250th is desirable for a number of reasons, all of which would help different photographers with their flash work.

It is quite extreme, agreed, but not uncommon in this type of image - the DR between the dark trees and overexposed sky is very high. I have found this sort of problem very difficult to correct - it may be beyond the capabilities of any 'CA' removal tool, and selective de-saturation is likely to leave obvious signs.

Ideally Walkeja, you may have been better to try a couple of separate exposures, one for the sky & one for the ground, and blended them, but if course ideally for this you'd need a tripod. The blending around the trees and sky would be tricky of course, but maybe with layer masking it would be effective? Alternatively, this might have been a good scene for an 'in camera HDR', with careful handholding.

Is it really insignificant? I can appreciate that (with digital) generally, yes, exposure wise, 1/3rd stop is not much - but in a 'fill flash' situation (with plenty of ambient light), if you're up against 'the stops' already, wouldn't that 1/3rd maybe rescue some important detail?

Or with longer focal lengths, couldn't it help and make the shot with that bit extra speed, (I mean camera shake), which for telephotos in the 200-400 range or so I'd have thought that bit of extra speed could be critical ?

Oh no .... you're really playing with fire there Peter

What??? ... my post above has gone a horrible green, looks so unatural. What can it mean? .... I'll have to check my settings

So not really likely ... or very unlikely?

It has its moments

Bump means nothing has been added to a thread, so its disappearing down to the bottom of the page and the 'OP' (Original Poster) wants it 'bumped' back to the top again - usually to flag up a classified sale again.

'PM' ia Private Message.

Glad you're going to stick with the DSLR - this type of camera is highly adaptable and the Specs and features of your camera are superb. You'll get plenty of help here if needed.

Looking at your gallery portraits there, I can't see any one consistent issue apart from slight softness maybe - this appears to be the lens from the look of it. Colours and other IQ matters it is difficult to assess based on the subject matter.

Why not put up here a specific image and give details of what you are feeling about it so that you can get other viewpoints on it?

Its not unusual I'm sure for slight disappointment at the very first images from a new camera, and new system as well. So don't be worried, its most likely just a case of letting a few things gel through a bit more use and experience.

I like playing with settings and reading the manual, so that would be my first recomendation. If you're taking JPEGs then go straight to the Custom Image Settings (right hand button on the four-way controller) and try out shots with the different presets, and look at the fine tuning options such as contrast, saturation, sharpness. Take a few shots of the same thing at different settings to get a feel for each 'look'.

But if you're not happy with any particular images please post them here so we can see - you're more likely to find a specific solution that way.

Finally, if you have been taking RAW images, it is normal for these to appear rather muted and lacking in 'sparkle' initially - they need processing to bring out the full quality.