I'd love one but they'd never sell as too many people were weaned on AF full
auto metering 35mm cameras. Just look at how hard a time most of these
people have trying to use a medium format camera and you can see why it
wouldn't sell.

And make a body they have no "new" lenses to sell with it? Yea that would
make sense for them.

And Nikon the FM-D and FE-D, and if Canon made the AE-1D and I could make
use of my FD lenses.
We could do anyway with all these modern AF gimmicks etc and take real
photographs :O)

[..]

I believe that, once you put a digital sensor and the minimal required
electronics and mechanical and optical hardware in a camera, virtually
all additional functions can be implemented in firmware without adding
any other hardware except for a few buttons. Cost-wise, there would be
no savings in making a manual DSLR, possibly the contrary.
Consumer-wise, I doubt many would choose a camera that deliberately
left out many automatic functions and did not cost much less.

I really don't get your point here..

Aside from the commercial suicide of it all, why?

I.e With my Nikon D70 I can choose to switch it to manual, average metering
and even manual focus.

All the other buttons become superfluous....what is the problem?

It's like buying a car with airconditioning and you don't like
airconditioning. Don't use it?

It's not as if all these other buttons are causing a drain on the battery...

Please don't tell me you are one of those people that say it isn't 'real
photography' unless you are setting everything completely yourself? Imagine
a sports photographer panning a racing car through dappled light and having
to 'guestimate' the exposure? A perfect use of A/S mode if ever there were
one?

The paradigm has been set since the early to mid 90's in film cameras to
have a lot of functionality, regardless of their utility to most
photographers.

My Maxxum 7D is very close to my Maxxum 9 in controls (and almost
identical to the Maxxum 7).  The only "added" controls are those that
control the "film".

The Maxxum 9 and 7 (and 7D) are photographer oriented with all
photographic controls on dedicted buttons/dial/switches, etc.  This
appears daunting at first, but as you realize that it saves a lot of
time by not having to menu dive, then it becomes very workable.  I had
shot hundreds of photos with the Maxxum 7D before I even opened the
manual... simply put it was just a minor variation on the Maxxum 9.

I operate my cameras in "M" mode most of the time.  (I used to be more
"A" or "S" oriented).

It would be great if Oly did do a OM-1d as you suggest, but with the
industry trend set, Oly's 4/3 strategy and Oly's weak profits, it is not
likely to occur.

Cheers,
Alan.

  You are effectively proposing a digital OM-1d, but I think something
like an OM-3d with spotmetering (one of Olympus' feature strengths)
would be better.
  Problem is that the buying public so much went for the OM-4
automation and electronic shutter that the manual, mechanical shuttered
OM-3 fell into an also-ran status in terms of sales volume.  I myself
fell into that, and so I still own an OM-1n as well as an OM-4 for my
35mm film system.
  I entirely support the concept you propose, so that my lens
investment (with some somewhat exotic and with some fairly fast glass)
would be more actively used once again.  What I have for my 20D is not
nearly fast enough maximum apertures to equal my OM system, and I have
an OM perspective control lens I would dearly love to use with a
digital camera.

  First problem is that Olympus withdrew from the 'pro' market, and
the OM system was very much aimed toward that market...you cannot say
otherwise with its formidable array of lenses including PC and
macrophoto.  Another (more significant) problem is with that the
Olympus 4/3 digital Olympus touts the benefits of their wide angle
lenses designed for the properties of the electronic sensor, which
makes wide angle film lenses 'less suitable.  So your proposal poses a
problem for Olympus, in that they still would need to design a new
series of wide angle lenses for your 'OM-1d' so as to not invalidate
the claims for why their 4/3 camera and lenses 'are better'.

--Wilt

But where's the tradeoff?  What do I get in return for
giving up the various features?  If I were going to use
a camera like that, it would be a Leica rangefinder or
something, where I'd actually get something in return.

The only exposure modes I ever use are A and M, so you
just lost me right there.  No interest in a "P" mode,
but want "A".