Unless I misread, it doesn't come FF, which today, where so much emphasis is on body size, is a no-no. Why would anyone want a large-bodied small sensor?
To get it right, I think the chap should have first found a sponsor or venture capitalist prepared to start off where the product should be aiming to finish: FF.
I'd love to use my F3 again, and the lack of a rear screen wouldn't bother me at all, but the metering with it wasn't much cock for anything but rough B/W usage. That means that a hand-meter would enter the luggage again. And expoure via meter, as for tranny, doesn't work in quite the same way with digital - at least not consistently the few times I tried that route. So far, I've found nothing happening to my exposures that makes me want to desert Nikon's Matrix.
I suppose that in the end, the camera makers already offer a sophisticated package impossible to beat without the complete range of factory services and research.
Not for my pennies. But then, the family has already been burned by 'safe' investment too. Indeed, not for widows or orphans, and at my age I'm sure an orphan!
Rob C
