One knows that for any topos E that the full subcategory of decidable K-finite objects forms a topos itself with 2 = 1+1 as subobject classifier. It is also said that E_kf, the full subcat of E on K-finite objects need not form a topos. That's what I could find out from PTJ's Topos Theory. The counterexample given there is E = Set^2 (where 2 = 0 -> 1). The K-finite objects in Set^2 are the surjective maps between finite sets. It is clear that E_kf is not closed under equalisers taken in E (!). Nevertheless, I think that E_kf itself does have equalisers : if f,g : X -> Y then take the equaliser e_0 of f_0 and g_0 and take the epi-mono-factorisation of x o e_0 : E_0 >---> X_0 | | | epi | x where X = X_0 -> X_1 V V E_1 >---> X_1 this clearly demonstrates that the inclusion E_kf >--> E does not preserve equalisers BUT it does not show that E_kf is not a topos. I would be interested in a reference or example where E_kf really is not a topos. Maybe, E = Set^2 alraedy works but it must have another defect than not being clossed under subobjects w.r.t. E because the decidable K-finite objects have this "defect" as well. Thomas Streicher