BTW, I'd rather do it in camera in the field. I spend too much time in front of this damn machine as it is!

Stacking photos gets you some of the way there but still not quite the same as a long exposure. I was trying to take photos of water flowing around rocks on the beach the other week and stacking helped, but not the same as I would have achieved with an ND. Lee Frost has used a 10 stop ND to very good effect.

K.

Pretty much impossible!

In terms of the sorts of photographs I would like to take, one of them would be Edward Steichen's photograph of the Flat Iron building in New York. I have a framed poster of that one up in my bedroom.

Cheers, Kris.

It seems doubly odd given that the camera is so distinctive. Is there any camera that looks like a 67?

K.

I have a bag full of my Mum's old 110, 120 and so on films all covered in dust and undeveloped. I guess they are all completely duff but I am tempted to see if they are any good.

K.

Did you notice that in the large version of the cover picture inside the paper 'Pentax' had been blacked out on both the camera and the lens?

K.

Pentax, sadly, have a long history of dodgy battery doors/clips. The MEII winder often broke (amazingly I found a new spare on offer on ebay!) as did the winder for the Auto 110, the battery door on the ME-F is flimsy, and I live in dread of the one on my AF360FGZ breaking. Seems such a silly little thing to skimp on!

Oh well. At least the 43mm Ltd is built like a dream...

K.

As someone who has never really tried portraits and is, therefore, utterly hopeless at them, I am generally quite impressed. The only one I dislike is the last one which seems muddy and murky to me.

As to high-key v. blown out, I would try and keep the highlights a tiny fraction below utterly blown out.

The fact that some people here like them a lot, and some hate them, is a good sign that you're pushing the boundaries a little. If we all hated them, or worse no-one can be bothered to comment at all, then I'd be a little more concerned.

One day I'll sign up for a lighting/studio/portrait course and kick myself out of my comfort zone of macros, buildings and landscapes!

Best wishes, Kris.

Or put it in a frame, maybe?

K.

For the sort of photographs I like to take, Pentax covers almost everything I want. The one exception is a tilt-shift lens like the Canon 17mm one. That lens, however, costs probably more than my entire (digital) set-up put together. In fact, my entire 5x4 system (camera, tripod, two lenses, two sets of bellows, dark slides etc.) cost about a 1/3 of that lens! I rarely have use for a lens more than 300mm, and if I did there are plenty of 3rd party lenses on offer such as the infamous "Bigma".

Cameras are tools for a job. Sometimes beautiful tools, sometimes less so. If the tool doesn't do the job you want, then get another one. For me, personally, Pentax provides most of the tools I want, and I am happy. I can see that other people with other needs would choose other brands. If you want a well-made relatively small body with a set of sweetest primes going, then Pentax can deliver the goods. If you like using old glass, then Pentax is your baby. If you want a monster 600mm fast prime, then unless you are very lucky (and very rich) you'll probably have to look elsewhere.

My only brand related gripe is that too many people automatically choose one of the big two for no better reason than they are "the big two" rather than looking seriously at Olympus, Pentax, Samsung or whoever.

A little off-topic, but I find it amusing how often someone says "ohh, you have a good camera" when I am carrying the K10/K20 with grip and 50-135mm lens (i.e. BIG = good) yet barely give the camera a second glance when I have the 43mm Ltd on it with no grip. I must treat myself to a 6x7 one day...

I'll put my soapbox away now.

Cheers, Kris.