Whatever you do, make some form of back-up, either two hard-drives, or DVDs or something, anything! Hard drives can and do die and although they can sometimes be "recovered" at some expense, not always. We had one which died, in the process of which had scratched the surface of the disk so badly nothing could be retrieved.

Best wishes, Kris.

Not something I ever have to worry about, just reporting that journalists were having concerns as a matter of interest.

Cheers, Kris.

I agree with you Hefty, I am pretty sure it is a case of style over quality, but that doesn't change the price it often sells for. Currently averaging £60 on ebay, the cheapest went for £36. The 50mm macro averages £50 but is surely a more useful lens and almost certainly better quality than the 40mm. If I came across a bargain example as Clarky did, I would buy it (I am a sucker for Pentax primes) but it isn't high on my "want list".

Best wishes, Kris.

Apparently, in some places they are demanding the original files through court action etc.

Not much choice in my case. With three excavation trenches open (each needing three cameras) plus finds photography there is too much for me to do. That is why I have four ME Supers and a couple of Canon EOS film cameras! (The EOSs were free gifts from people who had bought digitals and couldn't be bothered to sell their film bodies). I'll admit to being much more fussy who uses my LX and my K10D.

GPS in cameras has been a bit controversial because in some cases the police have been using it to track where pictures were taken, which makes some photo-journalists a bit wary for their sources etc. There was an article about it in one of the camera magazines a while back.

Best wishes, Kris.

Mirror: as John said, leave well alone.

Focusing screen: two advantages can be (a) having a grid to help get everything straight (good for buildings) or (b) having a split screen if you do a lot of manual focussing (good for macro). Mixed reviews on cheap screens, katzeye gets good reviews but cost three times more than my 50-200mm lens from Jessops will cost me if it ever turns up.

If you need neither of those features, save your money for a new lens.

Cheers, Kris.

I dare say the front element would have still looked pretty horrible had it smashed into whatever instead of the filter. Surely any bump bad enough to break the filter would leave a pretty nasty gash in the front element? It is only going to help with the more usual knocks and bumps one gets from dragging lenses in and out of a camera bag.

In reality, filters or no is entirely dependant on individual circumstances. I am cack-handed, I know it and I try and compensate for it. I work in filthy places. Other people use my kit. As a result I'll take precautions that other people find unnecessary. As with so much in life, it is "courses for horses."

Best wishes, Kris.

I do put filters on the front of all my lenses, The reasons are as follows:

1) My bag isn't big enough to leave the lens hoods on permanently. Have you seen the size of the 50-135mm one? Also, the hood of the 12-24mm looks a bit fragile for that sort of treatment.
2) I am cack-handed and am always dropping things. Not the camera or lens, but cable releases, spirit levels, lens caps, tripod adaptors etc, sometimes into the bag with the rest of my kit. In over 25 years of photography never has a skylight filter broken on me.
3) I often work in filthy conditions, i.e. archaeological excavations. The dust at my present site is horrendous. Constant cleaning of dust off the front element of the lens by my uncaring staff (i.e. wiped off with an equally filthy t-shirt) would ruin the lenses in no time.

To cut down the cost, I pick up genuine Pentax UV/Skylight filters from ebay. The more savvy sellers sell the lens and the filters separately. That way I get quality for not too much cash. Doesn't help when you buy a lens on the spur of the moment from SRS which has a wopping 77mm filter size. I coughed up for the Hoya filter that time (owch) but the bulbous front element of the 12-24mm looked just too vulnerable to me to take the risk.

Cheers, Kris.

Normally I do very little. I crop, adjust colour/saturation, levels etc. 99% of what I do would be done by choosing film, paper, developer combinations, and dodging and burning the in the darkroom. About the only things I do which don't have analogue equivalents are sharpening (a necessary step for digital sensors) and cloning the odd annoying artefact out of the picture. This weeks comp entry involved considerably more photoshop work than I usually employ, and I would have liked time to work on it more. I had quite a few attempts at taking the shot (I have very little experience of using flash in a studio like way) and I am not sure I chose the best "negative" from which to produce my "print".

Best wishes, Kris.