[paulusje]

You think so? I would buy one, and I only own 2 FF lenses! There's even people who dream of the full manual version: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/15728-dear-pentax-63.html#post2081708

I even know a pro, who already uses multiple systems, Canon, Nikon and Leica, that explicitly and repeatedly states how he would instantly buy any FF Pentax DSLR to mount his, one and only Pentax lens, the manual focus Pentax 50mm 1.2 on. Which he currently mounts on his Canon. (Apparently, the Canon 50 1.2 sucks bigtime.)

They could still be the first company to make a barebone FF mirrorless camera, being able to mount about any lens from any brand via adapters. Enabling people from CanNiSon who want FF, but can't afford it, to find what they are looking for with Pentax.

I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I never use AF and I would love to have a digital LX

[ChrisJowett]

Pentax have established that they are willing to make the smallest ILC (Q), the largest (645D) yet retain 1980s ILC compatibility for a quirky APS mirrorless (K-01) in the face of overwhelming pressure to release yet another new mount that would have resulted in a camera a lot more like the alternatives.
Given that, why would anyone think they would baulk at a 35mm full-frame DSLR for predictable marketing reasons?
They already have the mount and they don’t make sensors anyway.
It’s a relatively simple matter for Pentax to build a FF DSLR; really.
If they can make the Q, K-01 and 645D, a FF DSLR is a no-brainer.
Clearly Pentax do not follow simple or obvious paths of marketing, design or engineering. That’s Canon, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Pentax will never be as big as Canon. Some companies are very big and others are not. The latter are called “niche”. Pentax fills a niche and will crash and burn if they stop being Pentax and try to be Canon.

[topace]

Pentax will never be as big as Canon. Some companies are very big and others are not.

Well, do take into consideration that Pentax used to be bigger than Canon, at least as far as SLR cameras go. Not only was Asahi the first japanese player on the SLR market, I've heard it was the fist company worldwide to sell 1 million SLRs back in the sixties.

But yes, gone are those days and while Canon won't be big forever either, likely the market won't change that much in the coming few decades.

[Clavius]

The more I think about a barebone FF, the more I like it. Pentax could introduce it together with some very high quality manual focus WR primes. A DFM line of lenses.

[miles]

By a lot you mean "a few" and those will be pretty much the only ones who'll buy it.
Try selling a "barebone FF body" to someone who doesn't already have old FF glass. Good luck.

They still make the 31, 35, 43, 50, 50 macro, 77, and 100 macro FF lens.

How about this for a reason:

Compare camera dimensions side by side

And I wouldn't go out and say that the K5 is "barebones"...

[ElJamoquio]

They still make the 31, 35, 43, 50, 50 macro, 77, and 100 macro FF lens.

FYI, there's 10 lenses that Pentax makes that have been described by Pentax/retailers as FF.

You missed the 60-250 (debatable, sure), the 300, and the 50 1.8 (assuming your 50 above is the 1.4).

[Mistral75]

You are also missing the DA* 55 f/1.4 and 200mm f/2.8.

[ElJamoquio]

You are also missing the DA* 55 f/1.4 and 200mm f/2.8.

I'm not sure who that was directed at, but I'm not missing them. To my knowledge they've never been described as FF by Pentax, and that is my 'arbitrary' dividing line. They are full frame in reality and I have them listed as 'honorable mention' in my 'curent ff glass thread'. If I include them I should include the 35 2.4 and 40mm as well.

I don't blame anyone if they use that as their dividing line - in which case there's 14 FF lenses + whatever new comes out.

[reeftool]

If Pentax is going to bring a FF camera to the market, then most importantly, they have to start building more FF lenses to go along with them. Nikon and Canon never completely shut down their film camera divisions and the lenses for those cameras have always remained in production. Their FF cameras came to market with complete systems already in place. Pentax will need more than the handful of FA and DFA glass they now offer. The "use your old glass" model of the 645 won't work this time. Neither will the "some of the DA's seem to work on film". I don't think Pentax has the manufacturing capacity although they have the designs and will likely farm out the lens building if they do go with the FF camera. For years now Pentax has said "no full frame camera " and claimed to be completely dedicated to APS-C. If you take them at their word, then any FF camera will be a total Ricoh design since the buy out. That isn't very long. Do we really want a camera that went from the idea to market in a few months and only a handful of lenses? Do we want a " we have one too" camera? A recipe for disaster IMO.

[ElJamoquio]

Pentax will need more than the handful of FA and DFA glass they now offer.

I don't consider 10 a 'handful', I don't consider 14 a 'handful', and I don't consider 18 a 'handful'.