I frequently suffer from buyer's remorse. On receiving a new camera the first thing I do is test it - usually in far from optimal conditions - to look for reasons to kick myself over the purchase. My feeling is that the images here probably lack a bit of punch and sharpness because it's a drab day with low light levels, and pictures taken side by side with the Kr would not look much different. There may also be a few in-camera tweaks which need to be made in the first few weeks of getting to know a camera - NR, image settings etc.

The K5 comes close to (negative) film I think, but the dynamic range needs to be teased out by carefully pulling back the highlights and shadows. Film seems to have that dynamic range baked in to the image from the start.

Take this negative film shot for example. On digital I'm sure the shadow areas would be deep black, if the shot was exposed to avoid unacceptably blown highlights. However on the K5 (unlike the GX20) the shadow levels could be pulled out quite well in post processing, without becoming too noisy. I think this must be something to do with the different response of film and digital sensors.

It's just a bit of fun and mock-rivalry. No one seems to every say 'Ol***s' though do they? There must be a spirit of kin-ship there!

Think he means it doesn't have the AF point red dot... Not an issue for centre point focus and recompose shooters (like me!)

The K5 might be a better bet if he wants to use an external mic for video. I think the onboard one is mono only. Depends how serious he is and how much importance you place on catering for his needs!

None of the cameras operate AF in video mode (the K30 will do so at the push of a button but not continously). But serious video makers would use manual focus.

It's exactly the same with both (have tried both side by side in Jessops). I took my own 135/2.5 lens, and the peaking worked better with that than the kit lenses.

It does come with the addional 50-200mm lens. I would say if you want this lens, it might be worth it (just). Agree that K200d or Kx would be better options at this sort of price range though.

Patrick, you've captured some lovely moments very well there.

Focus peaking helps, but I can't imagine using it for sports! I suspect you'd be better off stumping up for an AF lens and possibly upgrading to a K30 becuase then you get improved AF and the (albeit not perfect) focus peaking.

You wouldn't believe the time I've spent trying out the focus peaking on the k30s in Jessops! While it works (as you focus you can see the in focus area move across the screen) it's not very easy to see precisely which point is in focus. On the Q it must be hideous because that camera has such a deep dof.

I tried a NEX camera on a whim, and the peaking is much much clearer, and can be displayed in colour (it looks like the under/overexposure warning on Pentax DSLRs). It pains me to admit it, but the NEX cameras are much better for using MF lenses than Pentax bodies, if you like shooting with narrow dof at least. So I'm going to go dual-system, with a Pentax DSLR for AF lenses and flash photography, and a cheap NEX for travel and use with M lenses.