Originally posted by janneman You may need some weigth as well, allow me to advice depeted uranium
Depleted uranium? Sounds scary; I'd rather go with Chobham armour... I'm not very careful with the equipment, so a scratch resistant shell is a must. Add submersible to whatever the crush depth of the latest Virginia class submarines is.
Now, what do I want? Beside the K-5, of course. Maybe the 15mm Limited, but that's on the market already. Talking about future, then; I'd like to see:
- Pentax continuing to move forward. Better products, higher class products (of course, that means more expensive)
- high quality fast AF weather sealed lenses (DA* MkII series?). Maybe ring-SDM, or a fast DC? Not terribly expensive, though pricey.
- longer high quality teles.
- more FA Limited-like lenses; of course updated for digital, weather sealed (why not? I think all non-entry level Pentax lenses should be weather sealed), with QSF; not necessarily SDM/DC.
What I would buy?
Cameras: the K-5. I'd rather not start talking about it's "shortcomings" (real, like the small buffer or imaginary) even before I have it. I'd rather enjoy it, than complaining after I have it.
Lenses: maybe a longer macro? A light, compact WR 150-200mm would be nice. Please, Pentax, put a focus limiter on...
- a re-vamped DA* 16-50, or a WR'ed 17-70. I'm not really into zooms, but from time to time such a lens could be useful
- not really a lens: a 1.4x WR, SDM-compatible teleconverter for my 60-250.
Jonathan Mac, I strongly disagree about the discontinuation of the DFA 50mm and the newly launched 35mm.
The first, the cheapest and maybe the sharpest Pentax macro. It should stay, maybe even be re-done as a DFA WR (like the 100mm macro).
The last, well... it's a cheap lens. IMHO it's only real fault is that it doesn't have QSF (such a pity...). A fast DA* would be quite expensive, thus serving entirely another purpose.
Even the DA Ls have their purpose; Pentax most likely realized there are a lot of people for whom a minor price difference is significant.