Unfortunately I've just bought one from SRS. Excellent lens I agree.

I'm just about to buy the 17-70 to 'replace' my 16-45 and 24-90 for walk-about, which I think will cure my LBA for the time being... 12-24 sometime maybe?

I like the idea of primes but in practice don't use them very much on digital other than for the very occasional portrait (OK so I'd like the 77mm Limited but it would only come out a couple of times a year).

From what you say I think the 17-70 sounds right too.

I'm just about to buy one myself to do (most of) what my 16-45 and 24-90 do. Range-wise I'd prefer the 18-135, but I do have doubts about its IQ - maybe OK as an upgrade from the kit lens but I expect I would be disappointed compared with my existing zooms.

Incidentally I was never convinced by long zooms until I bought a cheap Sigma 70-300 and tried it out in different settings - typically from a vantage point to capture e.g. boats coming into harbour, distant buildings, architectural detail etc. Now I take about 10-15% of my shots with the 55-300 - which BTW is an excellent lens.

Blurred ones

Interesting... personally I wouldn't buy an EVF camera until the VF is indistinguishable from optical _and_ enables accurate manual focusing, and would only go to FF if it was K20 sized or smaller.

I'm of two minds about small SLRs - on the one hand I like the feel of my ME Super, but on the other the K20 has a nicely balanced feel with a long lens or larger zoom.

I'm enjoying mine (bought a year ago and serviced by Harrow Technical, now used mainly with M50 2.0 & M28 3.5, though my FA24-90 should work with it too)... I could never afford one as a student (I had a Praktica MTL3 and quite a good motorbike for the same money).

This thread has got me looking at the SRS site to see what lenses are current...

I have DA16-45, DA18-55 (rarely used), FA24-90, DA55-300, A24 2.8, A50 1.7 (plus M28 3.5 and M50 f2 for the ME) - the aim is to have one spare lens in my bag at a time.

If I was starting from scratch my list (for digital) would probably be, in rough order:

DA 17-70 - general purpose walkabout (replaces 16-45 and 24-90)
DA 55-300 (or maybe DA* 60-250) - objects in landscape, activity etc
DA 35 Macro Limited - objects, general purpose prime
FA 77 Limited - portraits and objects
DA 12-24 - cityscapes, mountains etc
DA 18-135 - foul-weather walkabout (this would go to the top of the list and replace the 17-70, but I'm not 100% convinced by the image quality)
DA 40 Limited - because I like the look of it on the K20/K5

Oh, I've just graduated to Pentax Master

Well, I have 6 for use with digital and three of them do most of what I want:

A 24 2.8 (very occasional use only)
A 50 1.7 (occasional objects & portraits)
DA 16-45 (city walkabout, gets about 35% of use)
DA 18-55 (largely redundant)
FA 24-90 (country & coast walkabout, about 45%)
DA 55-300 (locations & 2ndry walkabout, about 15%)

Logically I'm missing something in the wider range, but I rarely feel the need to go wider than 16mm - I'm more likely to rationalise the standard zoom range perhaps to a 17-70 which means for trips I can take just that and the 55-300. The 24-90 works well on my ME Super, but I suspect the 16-45 would become redundant - a pity as it's a good lens.

Split prism focus screen option please for SLRs, then I might be tempted by the K5!