[giu.behringer]

FF SLR for all the Pentax goodness! But I wouldn't complain about either a FF or APS-C mirrorless camera with a Pentax ME/ME Super design and full k-mount compatibility, and some weather proofing as well. I Like the K-01, but the idea of carrying that brick of a camera sounds a bit less interesting that just getting a fully featured SLR instead.

[Ash]

Even so, in light of their price and size, full frame DSLRs will remain tools for professional men. Too big for the ladies.

D

I have seen many ladies lug around D3s and D4s with large telephoto zoom lenses for location shoots like sports and other photojournalism jobs. I'm sure if they had a choice, they'd go lighter, but they're probably compelled to be able to carry this gear around as part of their job.

I do think Pentax will not compromise on features for a FF camera, but prioritise small size and light weight, as they have done from day dot.

[Ash]

None of the above.

I'd take a K30 if it had an upper LCD and the option to use a grip.

Wouldn't that be a K-5? Or are you after its added focusing features as well?

[Clavius]

Even so, in light of their price and size, full frame DSLRs will remain tools for professional men. Too big for the ladies.

I know more female professionals then I know male. All of them carrying pro level FF DSLR's. One even happily carries two D3X's around. Mostly, it is the men that tend to complain about size and weight.

[olypdd]

Not at all surprised at the poll results thus far. I hope they build a K5-esque full frame.

[Rondec]

I would be glad for a full frame SLR with a size comparable to the K10/20. It would need to have in body image stabilization as well as having an updated flash system and auto focus system.

There have been a lot of discussions about MILC cameras and in particular, for full frame, I just don't think it makes sense. The lenses (zooms in particular) are large enough that decreasing the size below, say a K5 size, would actually hurt ergonomics and the ability to shoot comfortably for an extended photo shoot, or even at a wedding. It isn't really the size of the camera and the lenses that makes the difference, it is the balance between the two and the ergonomics of the grip/camera body, that allows you to use a camera for extended periods without experiencing lots of fatigue. In addition, the biggest two reasons that people want full frame are (1) better wide angles and (2) better viewfinder. Stick an EVF on a full frame camera and that viewfinder drops in quality to the quality of the best EVF out there -- better than a lot of APS-C viewfinders, but not nearly as good a classic full frame SLR OVF.

I do look for a 24 megapixel APS-C sensor camera in the spring and hope that some of the coming features for a full frame camera (auto focus improvements and better flash) are present on it. I would probably upgrade one of my K5s for one of these.

I would hope as well that Pentax would continue the K-01 line and make some significant improvements. It is a promising start and with the current prime line up, it works well with lenses like the limiteds and the DA *55.

[gazonk]

I think the two most urgent cameras now are a 645D replacement and a 24mp APS-C. The latter can wait a couple of months since the K-5 IIs is just out, so I vote for a new MF camera as the first priority. They need to make a statement that the D800 can't really compete with digital MF.

[lytrytyr]

Pentax's LX is 60 years old now - there has been talk of a digital reincarnation of this legendary camera given this significant anniversary.

The LX is about 30 years old.
Pentax (Asahi, Tower, whatever) was 60 years old when the LX appeared, hence the name.

If the digital version were to appear next year as Pentax turns 90,
they'll have to call it the XC.
But unfortunately, Sony already makes XC cameras.

[wildman]

I need better pictures not better gear and there is no necessary correlation between the two at least in my case.

The only thing I can think of is better ISO performance. I can always use more of that.

So take my K5, without otherwise changing it, and give me the same quality at say 6400 I now get from my K5 at 400 and that would make a real world practical difference in the quality of my final pictures. At least I hope so.

Other than that I really don't care about getting, yet more, so called "better" gear.

[Ash]

The LX is about 30 years old.
Pentax (Asahi, Tower, whatever) was 60 years old when the LX appeared, hence the name.

My mistake. I'd say we're still in store for a good product coming through for Pentax in ?late 2013 or early 2014. It's hard to get a trademark for roman numerals...

The only thing I can think of is better ISO performance. I can always use more of that

Larger formats allow for more headroom for this - one practical reason for FF.

Interestingly, after 120 votes, there are more than 50% of voters looking for a FF dSLR as their next Pentax purchase.
That says something about what Pentaxians really want. I'm looking for a wider audience to pitch in their vote here, so as to avoid as much selection bias as possible, but I think these stats so far indicate that if Pentax were to release a FF dSLR it would be sought after and desired, as well as make some positive business sense.

[wildman]

Larger formats allow for more headroom for this - one practical reason for FF.

Fine. Fit that, more or less, into the same form factor as the K5 if not even more compact and lighter and I would consider that.
Give or take a few years and that might happen anyway with an APS-C given advances in technology.

[Kunzite]

I would gladly accept the larger pentaprism housing associated with a better viewfinder. Please, Pentax, make it as big as it needs to be!

[Mareket]

My 16-50 won't cover a full frame sensor, and an equivalent lens will cost a bomb. I'm more than happy with the IQ of my K-5, so I'd love it if Pentax made a good successor to the K-5 and loaded it with features and refinements designed to make it as good an experience as possible.

I'd love an articulated screen, but only up or down if that makes it sturdier. I'd worry about snapping the thing though, but the benefit of being able to compose a shot without having to look directly at the screen or viewfinder is fairly large methinks. Autofocus that tracks 3D objects better would also be very nice. Speed-wise I'm happy with my 50-135 (veeeeery slow), but the tracking seems pretty poor. Especially considering continous tracking is supposed to be the main benefit of PDAF over CDAF.

Integration of MILC technologies would also be very nice. A good CDAF or on-chip PDAF system would be great, and would let you use the camera reliably in LV or in the VF, and neither would feel like the way you're 'supposed' to use it. Having this would also mean a much better processor, which Pentax really needs.

I'm sure Pentax patented a Hybrid E/OVF a while back, allowing exposure information, menus, grid lines etc to be displayed over an optical VF. Like the Fuji XPro-1. Give the option of EVF or OVF and that'll seriously shake things up. It'll add bulk and have a fair demand on processor power and battery, but you can always switch to old school OVF if you're running low. EVFs also allow for a huge number of digitally integrated enhancements, like the A99 letting you set focus scales (totally stole my idea) which speeds up focusing considerably and negates the point on having focus locks or switches on the lens, saving space.

1/250 flash sync, a clear focus screen as standard with digitally projected grid lines as an option. Scrap interchangeable screens if it'd save anything reasonable (considering the difficult design of a digitally integrated EVF/OVF system in an SLR), keep them if not. l'd love a focus point nub thing like Canon or Nikon. And if the camera could be a little taller (maybe giving room for the new electronics) that'd be great ergonomics wise.

Make the best APS-C SLR again. Then again, if the market demands it I wouldn't mind them developing a similar FF body. I just know it'll be expensive. I highly doubt Pentax will make an FF that's cheaper and has better IQ than the D600, 6D or A99. And lots of whining will ensue.

I do think Pentax should go with the hybrid VF or something that'll catch attention though. Just building an FF SLR like the K-5 is a surefire way to not really get anywhere.

[midero]

I'd go for the full-frame but, I am really interested in broadening the lens selection. Particularly fast primes. The limiteds are nice but relatively slow. An improved 16-50 f 2.8 would be nice too.

[gazonk]

I think the two most urgent cameras now are a 645D replacement and a 24mp APS-C. The latter can wait a couple of months since the K-5 IIs is just out, so I vote for a new MF camera as the first priority. They need to make a statement that the D800 can't really compete with digital MF.

Oh. I read this on the phone first, and missed the "intend to buy" part. But that makes the question difficult to answer, since I don't intend to buy any new camera until 2015 or so - my half year old K-5 is more than enough for a while.