K-1, 14 months, 20000 photos (gets a bit nitpicky)

Glad there was "some" useful stuff in there

> I'm pretty sure if Ricoh took the time, energy, production design, etc to give you the camera you wanted, it would costs more than you would want to pay.

I am sure *I* would be willing to pay for it.
But that is not the question - I actually also believe that the overall camera cost would not increase too much:

Most of the stuff is doable in firmware at no increased hardware cost.

A few things like the control lighting would require light hardware mods, for example moving two LEDs to the edge of the LCD carrier, which should be cost neutral. (I'd suggest switching to red LEDs, which would save a few cents). Similarly, going back to the slider AF/MF switch or using a press-button would be effectively cost-neutral.

Then there are a few things that would require a bit more RAM and CPU power. That does cost money, but we are not talking Sony A99II levels here.

The only things that that would really cost money would be the viewfinder shutter (Sony A850 does it and that camera was not in a different league compared to the K-1), the admittedly far-fetched screw-drive-shaft retraction mechanism (again, standard on most or all Minolta/Sony dSLRs) and the improved AF performance, which is an ongoing issue for Pentax.

Incidentally, those last hardware issues are more nice-to-have and not as crucial to living with the camera as the software things.

So, if you look at this list of niggles and ideas and come away thinking "oh my, such a camera would be prohibitively expensive" - I frankly think you are wrong.

Cheers
Jens