The problem is there are so many online gallery sites, with enhancements like forums and social networking, that there isn't a lot of point to the PPG if you take away that sense of exclusivity and it being very hard to get an image accepted.

I used to like how the Premier Collection was the first thing you saw when entering the site. I'm sure we all want the site to be a good 'ambassador' for Pentax, and that means keeping all the out of focus duck photos out of view, if not rejecting them from the site altogether!

The K5 looks like it's focused slightly behind the face of the cup. Are you sure it didn't try and focus on the straw? The 50D looks to me like it's somewhere slightly in front.

I think perhaps a little streamlining of the workflow might be needed there, but that's probably a topic for another day!

As far as your concerns on ISO, looking at your (really nice) model shoot with flash, I can't see why you would want or need more than ISO 400 for this sort of work tbh. Check out the jpeg image samples below. You'll stuggle to recreate such identical shooting conditions for your own comparison. The camera for comparison is the K7 as the K20D review has been taken down, but it's the same sensor.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K5/K5PICS.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K7/K7PICS.HTM

At ISO400, the K5 is already smoother than the K7 although both will print great at that size. As well as allowing a comparison between the bodies, the samples also show the effect of applying extra contrast, saturation, custom image settings, and the D-range settings.

Ask the seller if he is happy for you to send it off for a quote, then take it from there! Otherwise I'd return it.

Even in Jpeg the K5 should be better though, but jpeg shooters used to the K20D may need to tweak the in-camera settings to get the results they are used to. The K5 image quality is definitely going to be better in terms of printed output, especially at high ISO and in heavily corrected exposures, but even if it wasn't, I think it would still be a worthwhile upgrade from the K20D becuase of the body and performance improvements.

No they certainly aren't! One is taken on a dull day with flat light and seems mainly out of focus (exif says f2.5), the other is sharp (exif says f7.1) and is flooded with beautiful mediterranean light!!! Hardly a level playing field. To stretch the metaphor, these images aren't even in the same ball park, in terms of lighting, subject and camera settings!

I sometimes think that the weather conditions and time of year we buy our cameras has the greatest impact on our first impressions of their IQ

You are just finding reasons to torture yourself over your purchase. Please stop it for the sake of your own sanity!

Who is ever going to look at images at 100%? It's useful to look at 100% images for editing purposes but that's about it.

I think you have just spent a few bob on a new camera and are going through a little turmoil about whether it was worth it. (Been there and done that!) My advice is spend a week taking real images and getting to know how to handle the K5 (physically and in terms of PP or in-camera settings) before you start to panic.

The K5 should be able to print fine at 18x12 at ISO 1600, btw:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K5/K5IMAGING.HTM

I think having owned the camera a couple of hours is probably a bit early to form a proper view of the camera. Post purchase dissonance?

You can do a lot to minimise noise in PP especially in RAW. Noise tends to look less bothersome on prints than it looks 'on screen'. And, a little luminance noise does not, IMO, look too bad anyway!

Welcome to the forum Bobby! I ordered an MX the other day. Couldn't find a sensibly priced black one though, so I'm well jealous! Very handsome looking camera.

Sounds like a good idea. I presume the premier collection is what the general public see fist on the site?