Smeggy, with that capture count you are officially allowed to buy every new body that comes out!

SRS have the DA 35/2.4 AL brand new for £149. The DA 16-45 has become harder to find, however.

Thanks for the correction! I was basing my assumption only on what was in the article referenced. There were phrases like not having used an SLR in a long time, comparisons to Leica, references to being a micro 4/3 user etc., but nothing about other Pentax SLRs.

I have already mentioned the better high ISO performance and would certainly not diss someone for buying the latest greatest camera if they could. I would too!

What I don't grant is that the IQ is any better than the K20D. If it is, I haven't seen it demonstrated. And if anything I will believe the opposite after the evidence of the K-x. People raved about that too, but it has inferior IQ to the K20D IMO. The look is more plasticky and digitally smooth, like what I expect from a Canon (to generalise). That might only really be apparent in rare photos and usually only after digital manipulation. Also the colours are nowhere near as accurate... and that is not a subtle difference at all.

I think something was sacrificed in moving to the new CMOS sensors, but the losses are small enough to be appreciated only by a few, whereas the benefits of video and high ISO noise reduction are blindingly obvious and far more important to most.

But my own tests have shown a K20D image cleans up as nice as a K-x image (using Noise Ninja). It simply doesn't start as clean. That is, if I use an appropriate amount of NN on both, the resulting image at the same ISO is difficult to tell apart. This was contrary to expectation and not something I wanted to discover. Not after having bought the K-x for high ISO use!

K20D + FA77 and my images sing until I tell them to shut up, the neighbours are listening.

I appreciate the K-5 has better auto-focus (doesn't interest me much) and high ISO (always nice) but as for the basic image quality I have yet to see anything convincing. I would like to know what all these deficiencies are that the K20D supposedly has.

That may be true but I find it hard to believe. The forum post seems to be mostly about the 100mm macro and there are no images there I haven't bettered with my K20D. The blog post is from someone who (apparently) has only just started using a Pentax DSLR, so who can say if they wouldn't have been just as thrilled with a K20D?

I prefer images from the K20D to my K-x though everywhere people say the later sensor is better. I don't buy it. Likewise while I would love to have a K-5 (if anyone has an extra they don't mind donating) I do not feel restricted by the K20D.

This manic frenzy to upgrade camera bodies every 12 months is more a product of marketing than photographic "need".

Seems more like a discussion thread than a classified?

Good to know,thanks. I have an AF-1 and think it's great. More features than Pentax options and cheaper to boot. Though I can see the need for a weather-sealed impact-resistant model, I am sure it would be twice the price. Upgrading the hot shoe mount is a good thing since I too worry about the contacts.

But wait, you are in the UK so how did you get that duty free?

And did it keep you on the level or were you feeling the tilt?

For me: lens pen, mini tripod, cordless remote. Being able to set the camera up for duration exposures anywhere and everywhere is a godsend. Further down the list would be CPL, macro filter. And of course spare batteries and memory cards. For more money I vote for an Arctic Butterfly: best most foolproof sensor cleaner going.

As for spirit levels it rather depends on what spirits are in them. If it's a single malt then I'm all in f(l)avour.

Oh the irony!