What Is Up With K1000 Prices?

stevebrot · 10-22-2018, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by Xmas

Yep...An autowind camera with data contacts may have the required pieces to support a replacement back. The DMR came in two parts, a hefty processor/power module for attachment in lieu of a motor drive/winder and a replacement back having connections to communicate with both the R8/R9 body and the processor. The DMR produced a 10Mpx FF image at the rate of 2fps. There were issues related to both bulk and price. The DMR cost more than a Canon 1D II at about $6000 in 2006. FWIW, one could buy five Pentax K10D for the same money. Its product life was only about a year.

Still, though, it was pretty cool, but a far cry from the universal drop-in products proposed a few decades or so ago. Those looked like a film cartridge with an extension to one side to fit over the film gate. Several were proposed and none came to market. Challenges included both power and signalling. To the best of my knowledge none of these projects produced more than vaporware. The best known was the EFS-1...

Wayback Machine | EFS-1

...and why it did not work...

History doomed to repeat itself? Project promises digital cartridge for film SLRs

BTW, I was wrong regarding crowd-funding. The second article compares a 2013 project that did attempt funding on IndieGoGo with the EFS-1 non-product. FWIW, I saw a project a few years back where a guy grafted the innards from a NEX onto an Exacta.

Steve

jnd · 10-22-2018, 03:20 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by stevebrot

...and why it did not work...

History doomed to repeat itself? Project promises digital cartridge for film SLRs

Yes, the article mentions the biggest problems which still remains when you want to keep the same form factor, traditional sized film body: The sensor needs to be thin and with smallest possible border, open to elements and careful positioning. Can be done only with pressure plate removed and use the metal back as heatsink (which means no wifi can get out, too). That's doable, as well as using today's advanced and more cheaper sensors which have much of the support electronics integrated directly on chip (A/D conversion, some memory, perhaps even basic controller). Engineer would connect it with simple flex cable and route it to film cartridge space but that makes it even more fragile and hard to use - align properly.

Connection is second biggest problem and I wonder if electronically controlled shutter is better than mechanical one, if you can hack signals on cameras like K2 or ME Super, then you have simple system: metering start gets the digital add-on to powered stand by, shutter control signals starts and stops exposure. Image is nowadays saved faster than you can wind next frame, no problems there. Auto powers down after metering stops and without large display even small battery can last long time, more than 36 frames. You have frankencamera like the Epson R-D1 where shutter is cocked clasically by mechanical action but the rest is electronic. Manual focus stays the same, at worst you have to calibrate the sensor's position somehow. Interfacing K1000 is more tough as you need to use flash sync somehow and power up the sensor + electronics before shot, perhaps hack the metering system to use it when the cap is off and enough light level comes to the meter.

The practical problem is high cost with large sensor and small series dedicated hardware which even needs camera specific design. No one will finance the development. Even the new Reflex film camera (I'm one of the backers) barely got over the minimum funding and that's far away from what's needed to have profitable model for all those set up costs, that's why they needed another investor to have at least thousand high production run. I noticed someone mentioned somewhere plans for digital version but I haven't seen any concrete plans and it will be still quite hard even when approached as complete new, bottom-up design.

All in all I believe it's technically possible but needs a lot of funding from millionaire which has film cameras as main hobby

Edit: One brave adventurer can also hack already made product in destructive way, see the compact Sony ILCE QX1 but it's only APS-C.

---------- Post added 10-22-18 at 03:32 PM ----------

Originally posted by LesDMess

Not yet as I still don't have a Minolta SR2 . . .

Heh, I got two but they need more CLA than even the most beaten up for-parts K1000 I snagged off eBay. One starts to wonder that buying cheap cameras to later investigate and repair yourself isn't really worth it and that better way is to have one (or couple, at most...) expensive but recently professionally serviced. Quality over quantity, you know. Having couple stress free years of use even with rock bottom grade camera like the K1000 was can justify the high price in the end.

reh321 · 10-22-2018, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by Alex645

Why does anybody who isn't a pro photographer buy a MF or FF camera?

Better high-ISO performance

jnd · 10-22-2018, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by reh321

Better high-ISO performance

Which is true up to full frame in digital. Then you find out that MF sensors aren't so much larger than FF and the lenses are way slower which won't compensate the better ISO performance. As well as significantly larger price. There's nothing close to digital Pentax 67 with f/2.4 lens, let alone affordable one.

johnha · 10-22-2018, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by jnd

All in all I believe it's technically possible but needs a lot of funding from millionaire which has film cameras as main hobby

The old statement of how to make a small fortune from a given venture, by starting off with a much larger fortune...

What happened to AF film SLRs is starting to happen to digital, they lose their value fast as new/better ones are developed, while mechanical cameras are gaining value. Why bother hacking an old camera when you can buy a better performing DSLR for less? Volume is king, the big manufacturers get massive savings and efficiency by building in huge volume, likewise the sensor manufacturers do so from all camera manufacturers.

Chip manufacture works in batches, often ordered months in advance, the higher the volume the higher priority you are in the queue. One day you'll get notification that the chip you're using is being deprecated and you have the option of a 'last time buy', you have to order all the remaining chips you'll need of that type in one go - getting this right is a very delicate balancing act. Small volumes have no chance except at enormous cost.

The end result is a Df with massive investment by the manufacturer that still doesn't tick all the users boxes - because you can't re-create the mechanical feel of a camera good enough to please the purists and still please the hipsters (who you need to achieve sufficient volumes).

jnd · 10-22-2018, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by johnha

The old statement of how to make a small fortune from a given venture, by starting off with a much larger fortune...

What happened to AF film SLRs is starting to happen to digital, they lose their value fast as new/better ones are developed, while mechanical cameras are gaining value. Why bother hacking an old camera when you can buy a better performing DSLR for less? Volume is king, the big manufacturers get massive savings and efficiency by building in huge volume, likewise the sensor manufacturers do so from all camera manufacturers.

Chip manufacture works in batches, often ordered months in advance, the higher the volume the higher priority you are in the queue. One day you'll get notification that the chip you're using is being deprecated and you have the option of a 'last time buy', you have to order all the remaining chips you'll need of that type in one go - getting this right is a very delicate balancing act. Small volumes have no chance except at enormous cost.

The end result is a Df with massive investment by the manufacturer that still doesn't tick all the users boxes - because you can't re-create the mechanical feel of a camera good enough to please the purists and still please the hipsters (who you need to achieve sufficient volumes).

Yep, besides being sentimental about old cameras this concept lost its appeal when affordable FF DSLRs became available. It's intriguing conecpt for the technically minded but that's all and not enough to make it reality, not beyond some prototypes.

Nikon Df came quite close, problem was that it shows it's a modern digital camera, too many dials and switches, some compromises (not sure how it handles manual focusing and the viewfinder quality in general). Absence of video modes was funny cherry on top to satisfy the purists. Fuji system on the other hand looks pretty cool, keeps aperture ring, classic style dials, yet offers modern functions.

So we're back to high K1000 prices, despite the high volume at which were these cameras made, they are the original real deal of classic minimalist style film camera. Hipsters or youngsters, people want to experience it, even if for one or two rolls (I assume most will lose interest after that).

If the demand for film cameras will keep up then other, nowadays more obscure manual cameras will get price hike too and with hard to get parts or experienced servicemen, new film cameras will be needed. Reflex is one option which can live on as it will be open source system, maybe it was released too early because it's much more expensive and there's not enough demands when eBay is still full of sub $100 kits with lens (often even f/1.4) of something like Minolta SR-T 101.

**boriscleto** · 10-22-2018, 04:38 PM

There is a discussion that was just started in Mike Eckman's Vintage Camera Collectors Facebook group asking if anyone else had noticed the resale market declining in the last 6 months, especially for 35mm cameras...

A great Facebook group BTW, lots of Pentax collectors...someone posts a photo of a Spotmatic almost every day...

Vintage Camera Collectors Public Group | Facebook

Lord Lucan · 10-23-2018, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by Alex645

Why does anybody who isn't a pro photographer buy a .... FF camera?

Because I regarded APS-C sensors as a stop-gap back when (c2000) the cost of sensor manufacture went up very steeply with size. SLR makers decided for us that it was cheaper for ex-film SLR users to buy an APS-C body and complete new range of lenses than it was for to buy a new body with a FF sensor (even if such such sensors could be sourced at the time) and use our previous lenses; it was more saleable too as lenses are more tangible to the buyer than sensors. However (as with everything with microchips) the cost of larger sensor manufacture predictably came down, which is what I was waiting for; although it turned out that waiting for Pentax to make a FF took longer still, losing them a big part of the market, and I so bought a Pentax K10D anyway. Now that I also have a K-1, I can use certain of my legacy lenses as they were meant to be used, in particular a 100mm macro and a shift which were of crippled use with a APS-C format. I'm not a pro, but use the macro a lot in what you could say was a pro way, being for shots of mechanisms and similar small items for some non-photo forums.

The "stopgap" APS-C has become entrenched though, it will always be with us, but I don't regard the body size reduction from FF as being worthwhile enough for them to co-exist. Weight/bulk does not bother me but if it did I'd probably go for a Four-Thirds system, which is a significant reduction.

johnha · 10-23-2018, 07:09 PM

In the early digital years Nikon said they wouldn't make an FF camera - their APS-H sensor was good enough, it was only when Canon kept selling them when Nikon eventually followed suit. The FF lens issue of them regaining their own focal lengths first made sense after the the Leica M9 appeared - for the first time an FF camera was cheaper than the super-wide-angle-lens you needed for the APS-C equivalent of your beloved 28mm (and all your other super-expensive-lenses regained their normal lengths at the same time). All you had to do was pay for them all to be '6-bit' encoded.

Lord Lucan · 10-24-2018, 02:15 AM

Originally posted by johnha

In the early digital years Nikon said they wouldn't make an FF camera - their APS-H sensor was good enough

Are you sure about that? I'd never heard of APS-H so looked on Wikipedia, which said it was a only a Canon format.

johnha · 10-24-2018, 03:20 AM

Originally posted by Lord Lucan

Are you sure about that? I'd never heard of APS-H so looked on Wikipedia, which said it was a only a Canon format.

I could be mistaken about the formats, but Canon's first FF (Eos 1Ds) was 2002, Nikon's (D3) was 2007 - Nikon were adamant they didn't need one (but had worked with Kodak on the DCS Pro 14n using modified F80 bodies). Pressure from Nikon shooters and Canon continuing to develop and upgrade theirs persuaded them they needed one, eventually.

**boriscleto** · 10-24-2018, 03:51 AM

Originally posted by johnha

I could be mistaken about the formats, but Canon's first FF (Eos 1Ds) was 2002, Nikon's (D3) was 2007 - Nikon were adamant they didn't need one (but had worked with Kodak on the DCS Pro 14n using modified F80 bodies). Pressure from Nikon shooters and Canon continuing to develop and upgrade theirs persuaded them they needed one, eventually.

Canon wrote a white paper about why APS-H was economically superior to FF...

http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Information/Canon-Full-Frame-CMOS-White-Paper.pdf

Jellygeist · 10-24-2018, 06:18 PM - **2 Likes**

I just watched a video about the Leica M10-D.

It is a digital camera that has no back screen (you have to hook the camera up to an app if you want a screen...and to change certain settings).

It also has a FILM ADVANCE LEVER, which is something I've heard suggested as a feature of a hypothetical digital K1000.

It also costs 8000USD body-only.

Oh, and keeping to the topic of this thread, I have two K1000s that my uncle gave to me. They are beat up to all heck since he never cleaned them, and they have been all sorts of places, including (no lie) Arctic expeditions. I could clean them up and sell them for a tidy profit, but he passed away in August, so they are staying right where they are, just as he left them. Funny how certain little machines can be so much more important than others, just because of what they can do.

**monochrome** · 10-24-2018, 07:35 PM - **3 Likes**

Re: an unrestored K1000, of the 1007 Shelby Cobra 427SC’s originally manufactured, the very few remaining unrestored barn finds are now worth considerably more than the exquisitely restored trailer queens sitting in auto museums or shrink-wrapped in climate controlled warehouses. Granted, a K1000 will never have the rarity value of an original Cobra, but character is character.

Lord Lucan · 10-25-2018, 01:42 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

Re: an unrestored K1000, of the 1007 Shelby Cobra 427SC’s .... a K1000 will never have the rarity value of an original Cobra, but character is character.

I know that car analogies are a thing on the internet, but I think that's about the least convincing one I ever heard

How about a VW beetle or Morris Minor - Wikipedia (link for non-Brits) instead?

10-22-2018, 08:47 AM	#166
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Xmas Been done Leica FAQ â€” DMR Yep...An autowind camera with data contacts may have the required pieces to support a replacement back. The DMR came in two parts, a hefty processor/power module for attachment in lieu of a motor drive/winder and a replacement back having connections to communicate with both the R8/R9 body and the processor. The DMR produced a 10Mpx FF image at the rate of 2fps. There were issues related to both bulk and price. The DMR cost more than a Canon 1D II at about $6000 in 2006. FWIW, one could buy five Pentax K10D for the same money. Its product life was only about a year. Still, though, it was pretty cool, but a far cry from the universal drop-in products proposed a few decades or so ago. Those looked like a film cartridge with an extension to one side to fit over the film gate. Several were proposed and none came to market. Challenges included both power and signalling. To the best of my knowledge none of these projects produced more than vaporware. The best known was the EFS-1... Wayback Machine \| EFS-1 ...and why it did not work... History doomed to repeat itself? Project promises digital cartridge for film SLRs BTW, I was wrong regarding crowd-funding. The second article compares a 2013 project that did attempt funding on IndieGoGo with the EFS-1 non-product. FWIW, I saw a project a few years back where a guy grafted the innards from a NEX onto an Exacta. Steve

10-22-2018, 03:20 PM - 1 Like	#167
jnd Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2018 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 49	Originally posted by stevebrot ...and why it did not work... History doomed to repeat itself? Project promises digital cartridge for film SLRs Yes, the article mentions the biggest problems which still remains when you want to keep the same form factor, traditional sized film body: The sensor needs to be thin and with smallest possible border, open to elements and careful positioning. Can be done only with pressure plate removed and use the metal back as heatsink (which means no wifi can get out, too). That's doable, as well as using today's advanced and more cheaper sensors which have much of the support electronics integrated directly on chip (A/D conversion, some memory, perhaps even basic controller). Engineer would connect it with simple flex cable and route it to film cartridge space but that makes it even more fragile and hard to use - align properly. Connection is second biggest problem and I wonder if electronically controlled shutter is better than mechanical one, if you can hack signals on cameras like K2 or ME Super, then you have simple system: metering start gets the digital add-on to powered stand by, shutter control signals starts and stops exposure. Image is nowadays saved faster than you can wind next frame, no problems there. Auto powers down after metering stops and without large display even small battery can last long time, more than 36 frames. You have frankencamera like the Epson R-D1 where shutter is cocked clasically by mechanical action but the rest is electronic. Manual focus stays the same, at worst you have to calibrate the sensor's position somehow. Interfacing K1000 is more tough as you need to use flash sync somehow and power up the sensor + electronics before shot, perhaps hack the metering system to use it when the cap is off and enough light level comes to the meter. The practical problem is high cost with large sensor and small series dedicated hardware which even needs camera specific design. No one will finance the development. Even the new Reflex film camera (I'm one of the backers) barely got over the minimum funding and that's far away from what's needed to have profitable model for all those set up costs, that's why they needed another investor to have at least thousand high production run. I noticed someone mentioned somewhere plans for digital version but I haven't seen any concrete plans and it will be still quite hard even when approached as complete new, bottom-up design. All in all I believe it's technically possible but needs a lot of funding from millionaire which has film cameras as main hobby Edit: One brave adventurer can also hack already made product in destructive way, see the compact Sony ILCE QX1 but it's only APS-C. ---------- Post added 10-22-18 at 03:32 PM ---------- Originally posted by LesDMess Not yet as I still don't have a Minolta SR2 . . . Heh, I got two but they need more CLA than even the most beaten up for-parts K1000 I snagged off eBay. One starts to wonder that buying cheap cameras to later investigate and repair yourself isn't really worth it and that better way is to have one (or couple, at most...) expensive but recently professionally serviced. Quality over quantity, you know. Having couple stress free years of use even with rock bottom grade camera like the K1000 was can justify the high price in the end. Last edited by jnd; 10-22-2018 at 03:33 PM.

10-23-2018, 02:34 AM	#173
Lord Lucan Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: South Wales Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,961	Originally posted by Alex645 Why does anybody who isn't a pro photographer buy a .... FF camera? Because I regarded APS-C sensors as a stop-gap back when (c2000) the cost of sensor manufacture went up very steeply with size. SLR makers decided for us that it was cheaper for ex-film SLR users to buy an APS-C body and complete new range of lenses than it was for to buy a new body with a FF sensor (even if such such sensors could be sourced at the time) and use our previous lenses; it was more saleable too as lenses are more tangible to the buyer than sensors. However (as with everything with microchips) the cost of larger sensor manufacture predictably came down, which is what I was waiting for; although it turned out that waiting for Pentax to make a FF took longer still, losing them a big part of the market, and I so bought a Pentax K10D anyway. Now that I also have a K-1, I can use certain of my legacy lenses as they were meant to be used, in particular a 100mm macro and a shift which were of crippled use with a APS-C format. I'm not a pro, but use the macro a lot in what you could say was a pro way, being for shots of mechanisms and similar small items for some non-photo forums. The "stopgap" APS-C has become entrenched though, it will always be with us, but I don't regard the body size reduction from FF as being worthwhile enough for them to co-exist. Weight/bulk does not bother me but if it did I'd probably go for a Four-Thirds system, which is a significant reduction. Last edited by Lord Lucan; 10-24-2018 at 01:52 AM. Reason: Spelling

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K1000 vs. K1000 SE	JordanBraz	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	11	05-07-2018 02:27 PM
You get a k1000, you get a k1000!	disconnekt	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	26	04-15-2018 01:17 PM
Takumar prices....up....and.....up?	pickles	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	58	08-07-2012 05:22 AM
AFTER QADDAFI: Oil Prices Will Tank, Stock Prices Will Soar	jogiba	General Talk	10	08-23-2011 05:08 PM
Pentax CDN Prices going up (and in some cases...WAY UP :o	Jack Simpson	Pentax News and Rumors	76	09-26-2009 11:00 PM

10-22-2018, 03:36 PM	#168
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,177	Originally posted by Alex645 Why does anybody who isn't a pro photographer buy a MF or FF camera? Better high-ISO performance

10-22-2018, 03:42 PM	#169
jnd Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2018 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 49	Originally posted by reh321 Better high-ISO performance Which is true up to full frame in digital. Then you find out that MF sensors aren't so much larger than FF and the lenses are way slower which won't compensate the better ISO performance. As well as significantly larger price. There's nothing close to digital Pentax 67 with f/2.4 lens, let alone affordable one.

10-22-2018, 03:54 PM	#170
johnha Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Lancashire, UK Photos: Albums Posts: 1,155	Originally posted by jnd All in all I believe it's technically possible but needs a lot of funding from millionaire which has film cameras as main hobby The old statement of how to make a small fortune from a given venture, by starting off with a much larger fortune... What happened to AF film SLRs is starting to happen to digital, they lose their value fast as new/better ones are developed, while mechanical cameras are gaining value. Why bother hacking an old camera when you can buy a better performing DSLR for less? Volume is king, the big manufacturers get massive savings and efficiency by building in huge volume, likewise the sensor manufacturers do so from all camera manufacturers. Chip manufacture works in batches, often ordered months in advance, the higher the volume the higher priority you are in the queue. One day you'll get notification that the chip you're using is being deprecated and you have the option of a 'last time buy', you have to order all the remaining chips you'll need of that type in one go - getting this right is a very delicate balancing act. Small volumes have no chance except at enormous cost. The end result is a Df with massive investment by the manufacturer that still doesn't tick all the users boxes - because you can't re-create the mechanical feel of a camera good enough to please the purists and still please the hipsters (who you need to achieve sufficient volumes).

10-22-2018, 04:20 PM	#171
jnd Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2018 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 49	Originally posted by johnha The old statement of how to make a small fortune from a given venture, by starting off with a much larger fortune... What happened to AF film SLRs is starting to happen to digital, they lose their value fast as new/better ones are developed, while mechanical cameras are gaining value. Why bother hacking an old camera when you can buy a better performing DSLR for less? Volume is king, the big manufacturers get massive savings and efficiency by building in huge volume, likewise the sensor manufacturers do so from all camera manufacturers. Chip manufacture works in batches, often ordered months in advance, the higher the volume the higher priority you are in the queue. One day you'll get notification that the chip you're using is being deprecated and you have the option of a 'last time buy', you have to order all the remaining chips you'll need of that type in one go - getting this right is a very delicate balancing act. Small volumes have no chance except at enormous cost. The end result is a Df with massive investment by the manufacturer that still doesn't tick all the users boxes - because you can't re-create the mechanical feel of a camera good enough to please the purists and still please the hipsters (who you need to achieve sufficient volumes). Yep, besides being sentimental about old cameras this concept lost its appeal when affordable FF DSLRs became available. It's intriguing conecpt for the technically minded but that's all and not enough to make it reality, not beyond some prototypes. Nikon Df came quite close, problem was that it shows it's a modern digital camera, too many dials and switches, some compromises (not sure how it handles manual focusing and the viewfinder quality in general). Absence of video modes was funny cherry on top to satisfy the purists. Fuji system on the other hand looks pretty cool, keeps aperture ring, classic style dials, yet offers modern functions. So we're back to high K1000 prices, despite the high volume at which were these cameras made, they are the original real deal of classic minimalist style film camera. Hipsters or youngsters, people want to experience it, even if for one or two rolls (I assume most will lose interest after that). If the demand for film cameras will keep up then other, nowadays more obscure manual cameras will get price hike too and with hard to get parts or experienced servicemen, new film cameras will be needed. Reflex is one option which can live on as it will be open source system, maybe it was released too early because it's much more expensive and there's not enough demands when eBay is still full of sub $100 kits with lens (often even f/1.4) of something like Minolta SR-T 101.

10-22-2018, 04:38 PM	#172
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	There is a discussion that was just started in Mike Eckman's Vintage Camera Collectors Facebook group asking if anyone else had noticed the resale market declining in the last 6 months, especially for 35mm cameras... A great Facebook group BTW, lots of Pentax collectors...someone posts a photo of a Spotmatic almost every day... Vintage Camera Collectors Public Group \| Facebook

10-23-2018, 07:09 PM	#174
johnha Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Lancashire, UK Photos: Albums Posts: 1,155	In the early digital years Nikon said they wouldn't make an FF camera - their APS-H sensor was good enough, it was only when Canon kept selling them when Nikon eventually followed suit. The FF lens issue of them regaining their own focal lengths first made sense after the the Leica M9 appeared - for the first time an FF camera was cheaper than the super-wide-angle-lens you needed for the APS-C equivalent of your beloved 28mm (and all your other super-expensive-lenses regained their normal lengths at the same time). All you had to do was pay for them all to be '6-bit' encoded.

10-24-2018, 02:15 AM	#175
Lord Lucan Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: South Wales Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,961	Originally posted by johnha In the early digital years Nikon said they wouldn't make an FF camera - their APS-H sensor was good enough Are you sure about that? I'd never heard of APS-H so looked on Wikipedia, which said it was a only a Canon format.

10-24-2018, 03:20 AM	#176
johnha Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Lancashire, UK Photos: Albums Posts: 1,155	Originally posted by Lord Lucan Are you sure about that? I'd never heard of APS-H so looked on Wikipedia, which said it was a only a Canon format. I could be mistaken about the formats, but Canon's first FF (Eos 1Ds) was 2002, Nikon's (D3) was 2007 - Nikon were adamant they didn't need one (but had worked with Kodak on the DCS Pro 14n using modified F80 bodies). Pressure from Nikon shooters and Canon continuing to develop and upgrade theirs persuaded them they needed one, eventually.

10-24-2018, 03:51 AM	#177
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by johnha I could be mistaken about the formats, but Canon's first FF (Eos 1Ds) was 2002, Nikon's (D3) was 2007 - Nikon were adamant they didn't need one (but had worked with Kodak on the DCS Pro 14n using modified F80 bodies). Pressure from Nikon shooters and Canon continuing to develop and upgrade theirs persuaded them they needed one, eventually. Canon wrote a white paper about why APS-H was economically superior to FF... http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Information/Canon-Full-Frame-CMOS-White-Paper.pdf

10-24-2018, 06:18 PM - 2 Likes	#178
Jellygeist Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Brandon, MB Photos: Albums Posts: 334	I just watched a video about the Leica M10-D. It is a digital camera that has no back screen (you have to hook the camera up to an app if you want a screen...and to change certain settings). It also has a FILM ADVANCE LEVER, which is something I've heard suggested as a feature of a hypothetical digital K1000. It also costs 8000USD body-only. Oh, and keeping to the topic of this thread, I have two K1000s that my uncle gave to me. They are beat up to all heck since he never cleaned them, and they have been all sorts of places, including (no lie) Arctic expeditions. I could clean them up and sell them for a tidy profit, but he passed away in August, so they are staying right where they are, just as he left them. Funny how certain little machines can be so much more important than others, just because of what they can do.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-24-2018, 07:35 PM - 3 Likes	#179
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Re: an unrestored K1000, of the 1007 Shelby Cobra 427SC’s originally manufactured, the very few remaining unrestored barn finds are now worth considerably more than the exquisitely restored trailer queens sitting in auto museums or shrink-wrapped in climate controlled warehouses. Granted, a K1000 will never have the rarity value of an original Cobra, but character is character.

10-25-2018, 01:42 AM	#180
Lord Lucan Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: South Wales Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,961	Originally posted by monochrome Re: an unrestored K1000, of the 1007 Shelby Cobra 427SC’s .... a K1000 will never have the rarity value of an original Cobra, but character is character. I know that car analogies are a thing on the internet, but I think that's about the least convincing one I ever heard How about a VW beetle or Morris Minor - Wikipedia (link for non-Brits) instead?