You'll only be able to use Kodachrome until the end of the year. Then it will be no more than a footnote in photographic history.

K.

Not forgotten, just a very manic week at the start of term...

I'll get it in the post when I get the chance. K.

Welcome to the fora and have fun. It is a friendly place!

K.

PS I hope you still use your MX. It has many fans on here, including me!

Possibly, even probably, but you need to weigh versatility against that extra sharpness. Modern zooms are generally very sharp.

The kit lens is very variable. Some people have great ones and are quite happy (including me) some have less good ones and prefer the better zoom.

The 50-135mm is a stunning lens but also megabucks.

Amin and I both had some for sale but mine has gone, and I think all Amin's have too although send him a message in case.

Some of the older lenses are rather good. Because of the crop factor on an APS-C sensor you get a narrower field-of-view than on a 35mm SLR but you are often using the "sweet spot" at the centre of the image circle. Try them out, you might be pleasantly surprised.

K.

You need one of the MZs that can change the aperture from the body. Bojidar lists the mounts. None with a "crippled" mount will work, the Kaf ones will, not sure about the others. I am sure John can give you the exact low-down from his research into the MZs.

K.

Great shots again. I like the avro nineteen especially, and am glad I wasn't the enemy in the last shot!

K.

Lovely lens although I find it better for interiors (spirit level a must!) and great on site (no need to climb right to the top of a ladder...) rather than landscapes. Landscapes tend to turn into all foreground and sky if you are not very careful (although Matt has some good tips about getting very low or high with this lens). I find myself taking more landscape shots with the 50-135mm than the 12-24mm.

K.

I'd never, ever do a wedding "professionally." Personally, I quite enjoy taking photos as a guest and then if any are nice giving them as a present. I don't need that sort of stress, thank you!

K.

All three have great reputations and it really depends on what you want it for as they are all very different.

10-20mm. 10mm is really WIIIIIDDDEEEEE although 20mm is more like a "normal" wide-angle lens.

14mm is still pretty wide but as a prime is pretty small and discreet.

The 17-70 is not all that wide or long but makes a very good replacement for the kit lens. Much bigger than a prime though.

None will give you "much better shots", only you can do that.

Cheers, Kris.

I 'did' a wedding once, at very short notice using film and an ME Super. Thankfully the photos were OK. The nicest shot was of the bride and groom leaving the church. A little while later I saw this shot at the groom's mothers with their feet cut off. "Surely I didn't do that?" I asked. "No, but we couldn't find a frame to fit the print."

On a different note, I remember seeing an apology in a local paper. They had reported that the couple were going to live at the father of groom's. In fact, they were going to live at the Old Manse.

K.