Of course, a KD1000 should have full K lens compatiblity that the others don't have. I would skip doing the RAW thing. Instead of SD cards, it would use CF cards, or both. Jim A.
> This is a very good question. > Afterall is is discuntinued. So why bother at all - unless there's an > economical beniefit to doing so? > What made it great was the basic simplicity, low cost and durability. > Manual cameras had the advantage of great versatility as well as > simplicity - at the same time. > Modern cameras can't be, since they're automatic. > I guess a digital body with very few features would do the trick: > AF (manual override) - one focus point > AE (manual override), center weight metering only +/- correction directly > in > the viewfinder (wheel) > RAW/JPEG's at the same time - only. > ISO: 100-800 > Self timer > RTF flash > Most important: A price tag around 300 USD. > > Call it Pentax KD1000 > > Jens Bladt > > > > http://www.jensbladt.dk > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: Steve Jolly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 26. oktober 2005 14:39 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: Re: 30 years of the K1000. > > > Cesar wrote: >> Anyone want to hazard a guess as to how Pentax will 'acknowledge' the >> 30th anniversary of the K100? > > I vote for either a gold-plated 30th anniversary edition, or another > DSLR that's really a slightly-modified *istDS. ;-) A digital > equivalent of the MZ-M, perhaps? I guess they probably couldn't yet > make it cheap enough to sell in that market. > > S > > > >
