I would say that 28mm would frame a lot more landscape shots the way you want them, and without distortion (if a good lens). 35mm is too narrow. 24mm is another option but this has noticeably more distortion than 28mm. It may not seem like a big jump, but it is 14% wider... that is significant.

Even on digital I prefer 28mm to 35mm, though for landscapes my 16-45 zoom has in the past been my lens of choice. The 16mm equates to a film 24mm field of view, so you can see the numbers match up rather well.

That's so you can adjust a fitted polarising filter. Coincidentally, two minutes before reading this post I mounted a brand new B+W MRC CP on my 16-45mm. However, I bought a 77mm size (so I would not need to buy another) with a 67-77mm step-up ring. This means the Pentax hood will not be able to fit, so I screwed a three-position collapsible rubber hood to the front of the CP. That way it can stay on the filter at all times, even when I transfer it to another camera.

The little Pentax window is cute, but I can't help thinking the "slide out bit" would get lost in short order.

This forum was difficult to use before and now is twice as difficult. The overall look is hard on the eyes, the amount of space dedicated to advertising too great, the inability to edit messages frustrating, the inability to follow new messages a time-waster etc. Sorry I didn't volunteer all my time as a tester; I guess my opinion will be ignored. Though I've been designing hypertext documents since before there was a web and have written a definitive study on the topic.

And no, I do not think the community on Pentax Forums is in any way inferior to the one here. Comments along those lines do nothing but prove it as I have never heard anyone on Pentax Forums disparage folks here.

Erratum: it appears I can edit a message I just posted but not an older one.

I use my Vivi Series 1 105mm all the time, even though it is too heavy for some circumstances. I'd rather leave another lens at home than compromise on the quality. That said, the Cosina 100mm is smaller, lighter and decent for 1:2 images. They are not as sharp as the Series 1 but have a nice quality that suits flowers etc.

Not sure why the Ebay ones are warned against. I got one and it works just fine. Only problem is my ineptitude at installing it -- scratched the heck out of it. Many times cheaper than Katz Eye. Came with shim I did not need. $25 from jinfinance. Also got an installation kit of three items but if you have soft-tip tweezers that will do.

As always I second this proposal. When I step out I pack this and the Vivi 105mm. Rarely need anything else.

George gave great advice. If you bought a fast 50mm you would have a great all-round portrait, landscape, etc. lens that would last a lifetime. Add to this a reversing ring and you have an insane macro capability as well.

If you want a dedicated MF macro, look out for a Vivitar/Cosina 100mm. It's 1:2 but has an adapter for 1:1 macro. it is very light and compact, being made of plastic. But the optics are quite good. It wouldn't be quite as sharp as reversing a 50mm, but it would be easier to control and give you far more working distance to your subject.

Looks like this:

How is that even possible? The DA16-45 is a pro quality lens in all ways. By saying this you are saying that the new lens is built like what? A Limited?

There you have it. With the affordable and versatile DA16-45 you can blame only yourself for the quality of your images. I have one and love it.

Perhaps it will help to explain I do not mean "writing" literally but figuratively. It requires no zooming in. As for rudeness etc. I believe we are misinterpreting each other. Sorry for my part in this.

I suppose you feel the same way about all the works of art hanging in galleries with frames and titles. Let them speak for themselves!