Just trying to get together some most interesting shots I've taken from above, difficult task when you have some many of them.
These are nowhere as good as i.e. aliengrove's pics from his office, though.

As usually, if you click on a picture it will open in a bit better quality (forum thingy).

1.



2.



3.



4.



5.



6.



7.



8.



9.



10.

At least not a complete rubbish.

Could be worse (like bus shelter flying around the airport apron):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-16411914

Most funny there is this:
"Edinburgh Airport said it was working with Jet2 to avoid a repeat of the incident."
Not sure what they mean, asking jet2 to park planes somewhere else?

Grats, also, all 4 photos are really good.

Thanks for all comments, opinions and criticism, all is appreciated.

Frogfish I would agree partially, I myself prefer it this way as you described on one hand, on the other hand I do like interesting pictures they may have bits which I would prefer to not see, but as long as their presence doesn't cross my internal acceptance level I will enjoy the picture and story it shows, hence such takes here, also I never said these are pictures of wild animals in their natural environment which was never soiled by man's hand. No rotten veggies (at least from me), it is good to exchange opinions and I'm not afraid of criticism.

Decided to select my best bird takes, still plenty of archive to go through, but have chosen some (some of these I've posted on the forum in the past).
Mostly taken with K20D, some with K10D, lenses were 55-300mm (until today I'm still impressed by this lens - in its class) and 60-250mm.
All taken handheld (sometimes elbow supported on something if it was possible, no mono/tri-pods were used).

If you click on the photo it will open with a bit better quality and sharpness - forum thingy.

1.



2.



3.



4.



5.



6.



7.



8.



9.



10.



11.



12.



13.



14.

Approach to Heathrow and/or City airports, let me know if you need more details.
Some examples of what you could do there:
https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/some-panning-at-the-london-city-airport-1...#comm_127791

https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/user-6093/approach-5733

https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/user-6093/evening-departure-6115

https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/user-6093/evening-departure-7025

https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/user-6093/approach-6177

Andy, you've got some answers in other topic you have created here, if you use search tool here you will find plenty of answers to your question, also I see that you are asking the same question on dpreview... why not look through info already posted on the board...

60-250 is a very slow focusing lens alone (SDM is like a tortoise), this invalidates your first question.
Also I remember Mike-P saying some time ago on this forum, that 60-250 with TC wasn't a good combination due to drop in IQ for some reason, while *300 was much better.
As for 200-400, unfortunately Pentax still doesn't have any (that much needed) telephoto like Canon/Nikon/Sony have (so something like 80-400, 100-400, etc).

I like these portraits, also last one (temple).

I have similar problem, should I ignore another opportunity to upgrade from K20D to K5, or go for it. K5 sorts some of problems I would like somehow sorted in next upgrade, but not all, on top of that ongoing problems with quality of these bodies are putting me off.

I'm thinking now that maybe this will be the last Pentax body in this shape, if Pentax/Ricoh decide to invest more into Evil/mirror-less stuff, then I doubt they will spend any money/time to produce i.e K5 mk2 with some of its biggest problems (like AF) sorted-redesigned, they are able to sell plenty of K5s anyway and this could be an end of this line.