Like a super-exaggerated version of the 'centre effect' when using a 35mm lens on APS-C? The centre of any lens has to be sharp, so when using it on a smaller format than it was designed for the centre of the lens covers more of the image circle.

Having studied copyright law to Master's level, I'm well aware of the US DMCA (in fact it together with its UK and EU equivalents were the subject of my undergraduate dissertation)

The warning messages at the beginning of DVDs are not peer-reviewed scholarship, and are neither statutes nor court judgements. They therefore have no more authority in interpretation of the law than Wikipedia does. Feel free to read the UK's Copyright Act (particularly ss.16-27), there is no reference to 'copyright theft' but there are lots of references to 'copyright infringement':

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents

[EDIT: The DMCA doesn't contain any offence of 'copyright theft' either]

Copyright infringement is illegal, but copyright infringement is NOT theft.

True, but to get the same composition (e.g. to get the person's head and shoulders in the frame) you'd need to be roughly twice as far away.

EDIT: Torn over whether to get the Sigma 50-150 before they disappear. I liked the handling (and especially the AF speed) when I had two, but I did go through two without getting one that focused properly. Plus I already have the 100 macro. Isn't LBA lovely?

All my Pentax lenses tend to get to "about right" and then do one or two smaller adjustments to get it spot on (or what the camera thinks is spot on anyway ). If this is what yours is doing I'd guess it's normal behaviour.

Wouldn't work - the EU Safe Harbour Provisions protect service providers from liability for infringement.

In reply to the original topic though: it isn't "theft" or "stealing" (nothing has been taken from you - you still have the copyright so it hasn't been stolen). It's copyright infringement.

A small camera with a compact-size sensor. Why, pray tell, would a consumer interested in such a device not just buy a compact? Doing a mirrorless camera would be a decent idea in itself, but this? I think it's a couple of days early.

Not sure what this has to do with anything. Increasing the price of an item will (all other factors being equal) reduce demand, basic principle of economics. So people complaining about the K5 price are not contesting capitalism, but actually reflecting it: the increased price has made them want to buy a K5 less.

Yes: lenses tend to be at their sharpest (ie capable of resolving the most detail at the in-focus area) when stopped down, however this depends on the lens's maximum aperture. For example the DA 18-55 kit lens, or the Sigma 10-20, are best at about f8 while the FA43 is sharpest at f4 because it has a larger maximum aperture (f1.9 compared to f3.5 and f4 for the two zooms)

Really? I had been under the impression that the DA70 was very good, but not that good! I'd been attracted to it before, but put off by two depth of field-related issues: that I'd end up wanting an FA77, and also that with the DA70 being 'only' f2.4 my 100 macro could match it for bokeh given the slightly longer focal length.

A Lens. Tied up in uni work at the moment so no concrete plans, but anything from a DA Ltd (I like the idea of 15/21, 35, 70 as a compact kit) to continuing to save for the FA77 or Sigma 85. Any suggestions as to which of these paths I should take would be most welcome