what digital should i buy

[boku]

[font color=\'#000000\']Your $1000 is way out of the ballpark for medium format.

All you will get with a 200mm equivelent lens for $1000 is a digicam, like a Konica-Minolta A2. That is not based on a 35mm system either.[/font]

[BernardLanguillier]

[font color=\'#000000\']There is no way one could provide you with a reasonnable answer without knowing what you want to do with the camera.

Is your main focus landscape? Is it wildlife? Do you want to take images of your friends or of your son's indoor basketball game?

It is probably possible to find a second hand MF setup in good condition (old Pentax 645 with a 80 mm lens) for around 1000 US$, but you shoudln't forget about the price of the film and processing.

Besides what can you do with your great 6*45 Velvia slides then?... Do you want to scan and print yourself? There are no cheap medium format scanners that deliver a quality significantly higher than that of a 6 MP DSLR. You would have to spend a lot for that too.

Considering your budget, I would either go for a good second hand film SLR (Nikon F100 + 24-85 AF-S for instance) or for a digital camera like the Minolta A2 if long is really needed, or Coolpix 8400 is overall flexibility is key.

Best regards,
Bernard[/font]

[agganna]

[font color=\'#000000\']Can you guys- but all of you give me plenty of answers? I want to get a digital camera, not the top of the top for pros, but around a thousand, a camera that has a future and has all possible features with 200mm lens or more? What digital camera would you like to have if you dont have one? And why would medium format be better if it all depends on resolution?[/font]

[didger]

[font color=\'#000000\']

And why would medium format be better if it all depends on resolution?

It doesn't "all depend" on resolution.  That's only true within a given format.  Medium format is superior to 35mm because there's a larger film (or sensor) surface, so you don't have to enlarge as much for a given print size compared to 35mm.[/font]