Just rehearsing for a bottle of Brakspears (for which the spell check suggests "brainteaser" :lol Triple.

I'm on my own at the moment too. Mrs Oggy is in darkest Ireland at the moment, but I consider that an opportunity.

I'll still be pleased to see her back though.

Looking at the video, the line that has appeared on the sensor is as far as I can see, perfectly parallel to the bottom of the sensor. The initial suggestion is that it has taken out one or more rows of pixels without touching adjacent rows. Given the size of a pixel on the sensor the chance of this happening is astronomically small.

Either the sensor is read as a matrix and one of the address lines has gone down (which would not explain why the line does not extend the full width of the sensor) or it may be a hoax

I am surprised you got that one wrong.

Hi Peter - if you post a recent picture we may be able to read the shutter count for you.

Sorry Mike I cannot remember whether there was any PP, I don't think so. I would not really regard it as usable in most contexts - it took about ten attempts to focus.

It was better than I expected though.

Shamelessly robbed from another site -

Terrorists fed up with being treated like photographers.

Either PM them personally or select "Report problem/Suggestion" at the bottom left.

That's much more like I would expect Mike. The only reason I mentioned the TC is that it would further degrade the IQ in my picture.

Crumbs Mike - I am surprised the Bigma didn't do better. This is the 150-500 on a Tamron 1.4x TC -

Santa.

Next question?