[Finn]

Too bad it's not profitable to make a digital back for the MX. Surely the electronics could squeeze into the film canister slot, but alas...

[little laker]

I'd be the first person to order a camera like that as well, however like others say it's highly unlikely that it'll ever happen.
It would appear that most people just want to press a button and have a good picture mysteriously appear

[marcdsgn]

...who would buy it. Surely not a beginner, he needs (usually) all of the modes that have been removed from the K10D to start taking pictures before he has time to read the manual.

Heck no! For the beginner, there's the K100D. The basic manual SLR is for those who know what they're doing or, as filmamigo has implied, for those who want to learn and understand the principles of photography.

It has always been a misnomer by camera shops to promote the manual SLR as an "entry-level" model, as it implies it is for those who have never used a camera before.

A five-year old could pick up a K10D and use it competently. Just switch it over to auto-mode and away you go. But that's not the type of camera we're trying to conceive here. The market is already saturated with those models. I'm sure we all know someone who's bought a top-of-the-range SLR and raved about all the things they can do with it, and yet they've never taken it off full-auto mode, and the majority of their shots display no greater quality than what they could have achieved with a cheap point-and-shoot. The K10D is a brilliant machine, but I'm sure it's wasted on most owners.

The demographic for which the manual SLR is aimed, is not the oblivious point-and-shooter, but the experienced photographer who wants a no-nonsense back-up camera, and the student who needs to understand and practise the principles of creative photography.

[Duck Dodgers]

Kids these days...

Ya know, back in my day, we didn't even HAVE cameras...we had to poke holes in boxes...wait, yes we did...

The camera I cut my teeth on:




...and my first SLR:




Can't get much more "manual" than those.

Be careful what you wish for....

[marcdsgn]

Nothing wrong with the old klunkers, mate.

I still have a ZENIT XP2 SLR from the early '80s. Took it out only three months ago to shoot the Australasian lunar eclipse and a series of timelapse nightshots. No electronics, and a simple wristwatch-cell to power the light meter. So I could keep the shutter open all night long and not have to worry about replacing/recharging batteries.

[Jodokast96]

The demographic for which the manual SLR is aimed, is not the oblivious point-and-shooter, but the experienced photographer who wants a no-nonsense back-up camera, and the student who needs to understand and practise the principles of creative photography.

There's no reason a stripped down model would be needed for the latter. I don't see how a stripped down model would offer anything from a learning standpoint that you wouldn't get from any other model in full manual model. Given the rapidly dropping prices on on all DSLRs and the fact that it probably wouldn't cost much, if any, less there's nothing to gain there. As to a no nonsense backup, again, unless it's marginally cheaper, what's the point?

[Lowell Goudge]

The demographic for which the manual SLR is aimed, is not the oblivious point-and-shooter, but the experienced photographer who wants a no-nonsense back-up camera, and the student who needs to understand and practise the principles of creative photography.

That back up to my K10D is, in order, *istD, PZ-1, KR2s and KM

They all have full manual controls, and spent most of thier useful life there.

Except for the Pentax 18-35, which only works on PZ-1 and *istD, and the 10-20 Sigma, which is not full frame, every one of my lenses works on everything I own.

[filmamigo]

marcdsgn, you've capture the spirit of this camera exactly!

Of course you can operate modern DSLRs in manual mode -- I'm not arguing that you can't.

But having gone to film school (where our first year relied heavily on still photography for the basics) I know that there was always an issue with students who would want to buy and use the latest EOS or Nikon F100, and would end up using automatic features way too often, or becoming hopelessly confused when they were trying to learn manual photography on one of those cameras. It's my understanding that other art schools and photography schools face the same issue, and many of them would get around it by simply REQUIRING students to buy one model. Usually the K1000.

Remember, the K1000 and the MZ-M were available until very recently. They lived alongside the LX, the MZ-S, the F-80, the Rebels, etc. They survived because their simplicity was not a hindrance... a decent manual camera is like a bike with no training wheels. Sometimes those auto features just get it in the way, and keep you from learning how to ride properly. Noone is saying they would buy a manual DSLR to shoot sports -- those folks needed the latest EOS, and today they can choose from many competent cameras.

Today's DSLR is much more akin to the MZ-S or the F-80. The MZ-M and MZ-S lived side by side, serving different audiences. There is nothing in the DSLR world like the MZ-M. The audience still exists though -- spend time at a place like Henry's Outlet and you see them come in all the time. Students, who are about to learn photography, clutching a handout from the professor listing what features they should buy to learn on. They end up at Henry's Outlet because the DSLR world has left them behind, price and feature wise. Instead of buying a shiny new K1000 with SMC A 50/2, they end up at the used counter, hoping to find a serviceable camera. I see that many Intro To Photography courses now allow students to choose film or digital SLR. A true digital K1000/MZ-M would satisfy that market and create many lifelong Pentaxians.

Oh, I agree, an electronic viewfinder would never cut it.

Based on the "in-the-wild" sighting, and the patent which has been posted, I really think Pentax are onto something big with an optical viewfinder and an electronic overlay for review of shots and histograms.

This would work like Nikon's LCD-based grid lines on demand feature -- except in full colour and high resolution, showing your pictures and all kinds of other goodness! I think that would be a great way to negate the need for an expensive rear LCD.

I agree that it will probably be Cosina, or the Russians, who make this camera. The problem is that it won't be widely available, and it won't feature the chip and processing which make Pentax's image quality what it is. It's not like the film days -- you can buy a Kiev and run state-of-art Kodak film through it, and noone will ever know you weren't shooting Hasselblad. Unfortunately, today the chip and processing are the keys to IQ. For that, I want Pentax.

The new electronic viewfinder will not be an LCD but a electroluminescent film the size of the focus screen. It will work only with the mirror flipped up.

[TaoMaas]

I'd love to have a no-frills DSLR, but not at several times the price of the K10D as someone has suggested. Give me as good a sensor as you can cram into the thing and keep the controls basic. Heck, maybe even make it full-frame and give it the mechanical linkage to allow open aperture metering with K-mount lenses. Someone here even came up with what I think would be the perfect name...."Spotmatic D".

[Kaimarx]

Didnt someone post a topic along the lines of a digital 110? I would love to have one of those as a backup or just to use a portable candid especially matched with the da pancakes.

[Chocolar]

I think that kind of camera would bring a certain "cool"ness to the user, just like you're able to drive a stickshift

[Bryce]

I'd like a manual camera too. Not one with manual mode as a poorly implemented afterthought like current DSLR's, but one with a real focus screen, full k- lens compatibility, and auto features either non existent or secondary. You know, the stuff that gets in the way when you're trying to shoot pictures?
How about a REAL mirror up, you know, one that the user controls?
This might not happen, but it isn't for lack of a market. It can cost more than the feature laden things that are currently available and it would still sell. Examples from recent history to demonstrate my point: Leica M8, Epson RD-1, and from the tail end of the film era, Nikon FM3-a. The two rangefinders are even both fraught with tons of QC issues and STILL sell and hold their value. Because of course they are very usable cameras for more deliberate types of photography.
Seen the used values on these models? Seems like Pentax could make a killing offering an old school professional grade camera, i.e. a simplified and nicely made one with good manual controls.

[marcdsgn]

It can cost more than the feature laden things that are currently available and it would still sell.

Hi Bryce,

Hmm ... you know, I'm not convinced that it would cost more than what's already out there. A few people have suggested that on this thread, and I don't pretend to know anything about manufacturing electronic gadgets, but I've gone through the whole menu of functions on my K10D to see what would be removed were it to be brought back to what my MZ-M does, and there isn't much left!

For example, there's no real advantage to the three metering settings. Spot-meter is all that is necessary (if ever there was a time to bracket your shots, it's in the era of digital media when no film is wasted!) So I suspect that would constitute one of the more intricate sensor-sets being removed.

No auto-focus, so there's another engine removed.

And there's no need for an electronic focus-sensor either; Have optical split-screen focus instead.

We could definitely get rid of the on-camera editing/adjustment options (which are pointless on the K10D anyway, as it makes more sense to edit/adjust images after download), so this constitutes on-board editing software being removed from the mix as well.

Anyway, at some point, I'll type up the two lists I've worked out after going through the K10D's menus: One, with the functions that REMAIN, and one, with the functions that would be REMOVED. The former is the shorter list.

NB: In case people have misunderstood my initial post: I'm not suggesting a redesign of the K10D; I'm using that model as a starting-point for the design of a new camera - what I see as being a digital MZ-M - by stripping back its functions to basics.

[dhulsmeyer]

never had any formal training but i'm so happy i learned on a K1000