Thanks guys.

I am on a steep learning curve here and had just got the hang of Elements 8 (a freebie with my computer), so thought with time I would understand it better, and it does have features I wanted which Elements doesn't. The trial was an online download but I didn't want the subscription option. I thought that for £85 it would be packaged better and at least have basic instructions with keystrokes etc.

That's great, well spotted, I'll be there!

Thanks very much for the offer, but that's one of the points I am making. I use AutoCAD software for work which came with a comprehensive manual just like when you get a Pentax camera. Anyhow my eyes glazed over after chapter one of the Scott Selby book and got increasingly irritated by his jokey style, but I have noticed I get more impatient with things as I get older! I am getting to grips with the basics and got it rather than lots of different special software for panorama merging etc. but not really interested in spending hours on clever tricks for which it seems Photoshop is intended.

Everyone says Lightroom is the go-to software for processing, so after a trial I bought the software. First impression was not good; a really cheap cardboard box with just a disc and no instructions which for the price is unacceptable. Expected to trawl through YouTube instead, so I have now forked out for a book at another £20. In other software I can open a folder and see the RAW files as images but not Lightroom, they have to be laboriously imported first. Editing tools for spot removal etc are really basic, Elements is far better. Maybe I am missing something but it just feels clumsy and counterintuitive.

Have you tried this combination? I have been put off getting a 1.4x converter as I understood the lens attached needs an f4 aperture to operate which is outside the 55-300's range.

Black Watch?

Spoilsport! It won't be readers of this site who will be weeping. This must be the longest build-up to a product release in history.

[quote:One that really surprised me is the F 28 - 80 zoom (note - not FA). These are autofocus, cost peanuts and look quite ugly. I fished it out of a drawer the other day where it had been dumped since it arrived with some other things. The Stratford on Avon river scene in the gallery was taken with it, for example. It will get a lot more use now.[/quote] I too dug out one I bought as a kit lens in the 1990s and gave it a try; it has a 'macro' setting which whilst not true macro means you can get decent close-ups. The reason I don't keep it in the bag is it is much heavier than modern lenses but hey, maybe just the thing for a FF camera to supplement a good prime or two.

PS I bought a screw thread hood a short while ago which matches perfectly.

I'm in a position to upgrade or supplement my K50 which I bought to learn about DSLR, but have held off until the FF gives me another option. For the same reason not bought any lenses recently; I have a couple of FF compatible lenses - 100mm macro and a Sigma 150-500 - and an old 28-80 from my 35mm camera. What I would really want from FF is better low light tolerance. The most popular models used in Outdoor Photography magazine are the Canon 5DIII and Nikon D810 so it would be great if the Pentax offers a realistic third option at that level, but I'm also aware that the lenses will need to be of the highest quality to get the benefits which means at least one new lens as well to start with.