a) Yes, you can always sell it here if you don't like it.
b) It's very small, and very sharp (for a cheap AF lens), which for me makes it a useful lens to have. (A good 'street' and general purpose people lens).
c) I paid £22 for mine.

Mine too, thanks Santi!

I suppose FF has traditionally had a lot better high ISO performance, but now APSC has caught up (almost) a lot more Paps will be out there toting D7000s.

You could get an 18-55mm WR lens... they're very lightweight. Not perhaps the best IQ in the world, but you can complement it with your two primes when quality really counts, and maybe add the DA35mm f2.4 as well. Those two lenses would also be cheaper than something like the 17-70mm (let alone the DA*16-50)....

I like ratings, both giving and receiving. For me, it's fun, and that's what it's all about. I joined 500px recently and love it, it's like EPZ before it got cluttered with ads and features.

The portfolio feature in particular is brilliant.

I find the idea that people go to full frame because they are insecure a bit patronising. Pentax have some lovely full frame lenses, and it's a great pity you have to stick them on a Canon to use them properly, ie without the 1.5 crop which makes their focal length less useful and increases dof. There's also no reason FF cameras and lenses need to be massive. Is the FA43 or 31mm really a big lens? That said, I wouldn't be able to afford a FF body anyway, even if Pentax made one. Closest I can come is use film.

If Ricoh/ Pentax managed to produce a quality, relatively compact FF body, I'm sure there'd be a lot of interest.

Chris

I suppose you could get a similar effect shooting full frame digital and carefully processing the images. But maybe you can call me a bit of a romantic, I still think film has an organic quality which is hard to reproduce digitally. I have similar views on laminate flooring vs real wood.

There has not been a nanometre of progress towards any sort of resolution, nor any satisfactory engagement from the moderation team, so continuing does seem a bit futile.

Yep! Nice choice Dave.

Sounds odd, Greg! I understand what you are describing but have never had that happen to me... usually the cursor moves and the picture stays steady rather than vice versa ("Ford... if this is Southend there's something very odd about it. Perhaps it's the way the buildings are washing up and down, but the sea stays steady as a rock"...)

Edit - glad you solved your problem. Not sure why the sample all layers tickbox should have that effect though.