Looks like you were just a few seconds away from having to post in the 'adult photos' section John...

Looks a great machine, higher spec than mine and I presume higher than your current pc, which I assume is quite serviceable. Can't really see the point in paying more. People will tell you you need to spend a grand on a pc. That's rubbish. Unless you are editing a lot of 1020p video, you could probably get away with a relatively cheap general purpose desktop.

I've has exactly the same thing happen with Audacity. The method of turning the mic volume down in Windows already described 'should' work so I think you muct have done something wrong like mute the whole system volume. You need to double click the speaker icon and follow the menu until you get to 'recording control'.

Another way is go to 'control panel' from the startup menu, then 'sounds speech and audio devices', and 'adjust the system volume'. That takes you to a menu where you can adjust the microphone volume.

That should ONLY affect sounds entering via the built in mic or the mic socket. If this isn't the case you have done something wrong and need to retrace your steps.

If this isn't the same in Vista, go to Windows Help and search for the following: adjust the volume for multimedia recording devices

As far as editing goes, you need to import the music files into Audacity, rather than use Audacity to record them - is this what you were doing? There shouldn't be any issue with the open mic in that case anyway, as you are not recording sound, you are manipulating sound files by pushing and pulling them about etc.

Great set Smeg! Almost an HDR look to your images since you got the K5.

Great pensive shot of Anastasia. No. 3 reminds me I must get that frozen chicken out of the freezer. No. 13 is lovely. And I like the reflection in no. 15's specs. Does everyone you photograph these days just happen to have massive pores or is it something you're doing in PP?

Wow, well done Simon!

The images on imaging resource were initially at 2000 x 1500, and looked ace at iso1600. Better than samples I have seen from the TX5 which is good for a compact. Sensor development moves on all the time. Of course a bigger sensor would be better, but we knew this was coming, and within the constraints of a tiny sensor I think they've done really well. I was fearful that they'd use the sensor from the RS100 or something- that really would have been a shame!

Then factor in that the bright 1.9 lens will mean you probably won't need such high iso's, and things don't look so bad.

I certainly wouldn't spend 600.00 on it, but really it's not so awful, and it's not like they're forcing anyone to buy it!

To Jovan - there IS a further camera to be announced later this year, probably with K-mount. I think they should have announced it first, as there is already pent-up demand for such a product. As far as being ugly... I strongly disagree, although I really don't like the off-white version, which looks 'antiqued' (or nicotine stained!) I expected to hate the Q, but I'm actually finding myself won over - apart from the cost!

I hope the sensor finds its way into cheaper Pentax compacts.

ISO 6400: link

Looks handsome in black, IMO!

At 300 quid i'd probably buy one. At 630 smackeroos frankly they can stick it up their aperture

Aw come on! It's not an NEX competitor, but it ought to give the LX5 etc a run for their money. We've been asking Pentax for a better compact for years, well here it is.

Pentax should probably have released their apsc model first though, to avoid these sort of comments.

Uses a (Sony?) backlit CMOS... high ISO looks better than average for a compact: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/PENTAXQ/PENTAXQA7.HTM

Interesting product.