Nice set. Seems you have found excellent spot.

Where Olympus won is novelty and fresh thinking. OM-D despite smaller sensor seems to be delivering very good IQ and noise performance (judging by samples and tests), this is a step forward for these m4/3 sensors. AF speed and precision seems to be one of the best on the market among mirrorless cameras (and possibly some of DSLRs as well) - where Fuji failed unfortunately (not to say that they product lacks in novelty, just not here).
Seen here many times in regards to Pentax is argument about using manual lenses, come on Gents, it may work for a group of people, in some situations, but it is not what is going to sell system to wider audience, not what is going to make this product usable in all situations where people may want to use it, simply this is not enough.
Pentax can't also rely on the legacy of old lenses and neglect need of introducing new lenses that are missing from portfolio and could perform well against competition, thanks to that they are still niche product, unfortunately not because of great qualities, features packaged into not very well known name - just because system doesn't compare that well to others for large group of potential users.
Some of you may think it is a bit of overstatement - but exactly in the way some of you try to say system is good enough because you can find some old, manual lenses on second-hand market.
I think Pentax has to take a brave decision and if next generation product (i.e. why carry that massive mirror box as people used for many years ) needs new mount, new lenses, new design - just do it (hopefully they are already working on it and will surprise us i.e. next year), just don't stop half way and produce competitive portfolio of lenses and cameras, otherwise it will be a fail.

Lets fuel some more speculations :
http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/pentax-k-30-analisis,1_8786

Lol, but yes

Good ones Rob, you had good light, god positioning and nice backgrounds, photos are nicely sharp with good prop blur, well done (I'm a bit envy about air-air as well ).

Quality suffers a bit, nevertheless a great set again thanks to less frequently seen situations.

Couple of views around Greenwich pier and HMS Ocean and Lynx helicopters landing on board.
Click on pictures for a bit bigger version and better quality.

1.



2.



3.



4.



5.



6.



7.



8.



9.



10.



11.



12.



13.



14.



15.

It definitely doesn't look good, subsequent frames are not in focus/blurred (clearly visible from around frame 3 in sequence around 0:57s) it is not about HD, just basic quality proving what they say i the add, what is the point in showing there a picture that qualifies only to be deleted.
Yes I do expect prepared marketing ad to look great! - this is the purpose of it, it is not some beginner doing some DIY to show it on youtube, somebody takes money for it, somebody accepts it and pays for it, this is not real photo session hence possibility to make things look better than they are, here is rather opposite (or maybe just honest ).

Accidentally I've had a look at K-5 advert on jessops website:
http://tinyurl.com/cam8whl

What a bad marketing, around 0:52sec they show off with continues shooting - by taking pics of a plane, just after that they go through couple of frames, first looks ok as expected, then the rest is not in focus or blurry, not at all "crisp pictures of a fast moving subject" as they advertise...

I think it would look better if you would level it up, for the banner like one - to the runway level (CW rotation).