Just doing their job, exactly. Sensible people use their discretion. Trafalgar Square is one of the most photographed places in Britain, and although it is technically private property, forms part of the 'public realm' of London. I bet if 'Public Squares' came up on Family Fortunes, Trafalgar Square would be the top answer!

Therefore to single out these people, and continue to prevent them taking pictures even after hearing their explanation about the charity bike ride, is overly officious IMO.

When it comes to photographing Peregrin chicks I have a lot more sympathy for upholding the rules and regulations. It should be illegal to knowingly approach the nest without a permit, let alone take photographs.

(There are a few on here like that as well!)

I love the second shot, captured at exactly the right, lip-trembling, moment.

I have read about similar things in AP, but the fact that this was a Charity Fundraising Event makes it all the more depressing. I realise we have to have rules, but why (in this country) are we so obsessed with following them so inflexibly and insensitively?

Now I know why Pentax User seems such a friendly place... everything vaguely confrontational gets immediately deleted! Welcome to the Stepford-Forum

All this argy bargy is totally unnecessary though - in my humble view, the original thread was innoccuous and should not have been deleted, but I also think the OP should have contacted the mod behind the scenes rather than create this thread to air his grievances... I am sure John is willing to be reasonable but this thread only esccalates the situation.

Fun though.

or, in my case, eating for the rest of the year...

If cleaning the contacts doesn't work, send it back. I know of one forum member who has this lens and would probably sell it, so post a Wanted advert if you want a replacement. But you should be able to meter using the aperture ring in manual mode - you need to close the lens down with the optical preview (presuming the k-m has one!) and adjust your shutter speed accordingly.

I believe it is a nice lens, supposedly sharp wide open, and will deliver shallow DOF on close up subjects. Example: link

But unless you are after 'environmental portraits' the 50mm would be better - you should be able to meter in manual in the same way - or use the kit lens.

Sorry John - have removed the full-size image and put in a link instead.

Have a look at pixel-peeper: link

I have decided to stick with the much cheaper 18-55 mkII rather than the 16-45, and will start saving for a wide angle prime lens. Image below is 16-45mm at f8:

--- --- ---

Edit- full size image removed at John's request - image location is:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3109/2684804381_d4906ab55e_o.jpg

Pentax 50-200mm: link

Much more expensive Sigma 70-200mm f2.8: link

My opinion is the difference in image quality is hardly like day and night. While the dearer f2.8 lens will let you shoot in lower light, action etc, the Pentax is far more portable and a good bet for general shooting.

To be honest, I would have gone for EITHER a 50-200 or a 70-300mm zoom, not both, but that's me, ever frugal!

Maybe for you. But for a lot of people, the idea of a relatively cheap, ultra compact, APS-C sensor body that accepts K-mount lenses is an intriguing idea, even with the viewfinder compromise. Particularly if it meant they stepped up production of the DA 21mm lens.