All the Kodak DCS units were based on existing Nikon or Canon bodies, starting with the F3 in 1991. The sole exception is the DCS/c which was a Sigma body with a Canon bayonet on it.
The DCS 600's (F5 based) and later were heavily modified bodies, but earlier models were really just backs and processing units a la Leica DMR, you could even swap the body (to another of the same model of course) -Adam Bong Manayon wrote: > Kodak DCS 460 (?) was based on an existing Nikon body (they later made > another model based on the EOS). Fuji evolved their FineFix DSLR > based on the same idea (also a Nikon body). I was sort of waiting for > something like that to happen to my MZ5n but I guess we were not much > of a "market" for them. But considering the the Kodak paradigm of > replacing the databack and adding a hard disk for a motor drive. I > had this idea of gutting one of those cheap digital point and shoots > and slapping their electronics on the databack; we don't need the hard > drive now that we have gigabytes of memory cards available. That can > be feasibly done on a Spotmatic... > > (In the original thread someone said that it should be mentioned to > Tamron before someone else steals it. I told to this to an > acquaintance who worked in the Pentax plant here in the > Philippines...but what can I say, he's just a slightly higher life > form than a janitor). > > On 2/21/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> There's a company that makes stereo cameras by "mating" two 35mm SLRs >> together. The lenses are identical, and hooked together so that the user >> can zoom at the same time and focus at the same time. The RBT camera is >> expensive, but a few members of my stereo club have purchased these >> cameras. Don't know how profitable it is to make these cameras. >> I have a nice collection of M42 lenses that I can use with my *ist D. I >> agree that it is a long shot that a digital M42 body will be made. If one >> is made, what price would M42 lens owners be willing to pay for one? >> The RBT stereo slrs can cost up to $4,000 USD. Is that too high a price >> for an M42 digital camera? >> >> Jim A. >> >> >> >> >> >>> Although it would be pretty cool if it happened, I don't think an M42 dSLR >>> has a snowball's chance in hell of being made. Why? Simple answer: old >>> technology just doesn't sell well. Modern consumers want convenience, and >>> as far as cameras go, that means full automation, including autofocus. >>> Those of us with an appreciation for the past are too few in number to >>> make >>> an M42 dSLR camera profitable. >>> >>> And really, the bottom line here is "profitable." >>> >>> I could give more reasons, if you'd like, but don't take this as an "it's >>> a >>> stupid idea!" response. I think it'd be pretty cool, as I said, just not >>> economically feasible. >>> >>> John >>> >>> -- >>> http://www.neovenator.com >>> http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 8:29 AM >>> Subject: 85mm f1.8 SMCT on ebay : $400+ >>> >>> >>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260086611089 >>>> >>>> It seems the Pentax M42 quality lens market is still very strong >>>> and getting even stronger lately. I have never seen one of these sell >>>> for over $400 until now. ( I bought my first one for $100 in '88 ) >>>> Could you imagine what would happen to this SMCT market if somebody did >>>> produce a auto aperture supporting M42 DSLR? >>>> >>>> jco >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
