[french_mike]

I think this line of new lenses will be a great start:

14-24mm F2.8
24-70mm F2.8
700-200mm F2.8
135-400mm F3.5
35mm F1.4
55mm F1.4 II
85mm F1.4
135mm F2
300mm F2.8
500mm F5.6
24mm F3.5 tilt/shift lens

the dream team you have there ...

[starbase218]

DA60-250: FF from patents. Now is a perfect at edges, maybe not. But a whole lot of lenses are such, aren't they? They aren't automatically labelled crop lenses though.

Ok, that's obviously a different story then.

[Edvinas]

As already pointed out, the 60-250 seems to be FF, so IMHO the only absolute requirement at release date is a 24-70-something lens (with a promise of a later release of an UWA lens, perhaps).

60-250mm isn't f/2.8. I must agree that f/2.8 telezoom is a requirement for FF lineup.

[eddie1960]

a 2.8 is required for FF i agreee but it need not be 60-250 70-200 will suffice (and 24-70 and 16-24 )

[monochrome]

a 2.8 is required for FF i agreee but it need not be 60-250 70-200 will suffice (and 24-70 and 16-24 )

Redo of the FA* designs plus some original engineering for the 16-24 (maybe some of the DA can be adapted). Of course the optics have to be rethought because there can't be any lead in the glass, so the optical properties are different.

Crazy EU - as if our kids will eat our lenses.

[DaveBlack]

Redo of the FA* designs plus some original engineering for the 16-24 (maybe some of the DA can be adapted). Of course the optics have to be rethought because there can't be any lead in the glass, so the optical properties are different.

Crazy EU - as if our kids will eat our lenses.

Yes!!!! Re-release the FA* lenses with modern coatings and electronics.

Dave

[gazonk]

60-250mm isn't f/2.8. I must agree that f/2.8 telezoom is a requirement for FF lineup.

Ok, I agree on that, but I still think only 24-70ish is required (as I said) to be available on the release date - in addition to the current FF lineup (esp. the three amigos), of course!

[eurostar]

It depends. I don't think that a Pentax full frame would interest pro-shooters (that niche is strongly in the hand of Nikon and Canon) so they could go with a camera for upper amaterus, sort of like Fujifilm has done with X-1 Pro. That camera has just three lenses, of outstanding quality. And Pentax could make a full frame camera with highly vintage look (sort of digital LX, not very different from K-5 but with a lot less digital wheels and pushbuttons, just a shutter wheel with co-axial ISO wheel, and aperture control just on the lens) to be presented along the three amigos (in kit with FA 43 limited). Then, in time, IF the camera see success, they could make other fullframe lenses. Sort of 645D strategy. Announce a limited production, and if the product sells, produce it beyond the self imposed limit.

[Clavius]

It depends. I don't think that a Pentax full frame would interest pro-shooters (that niche is strongly in the hand of Nikon and Canon)

It's true that it will certainly not interest many established pro shooters...

...Luckily, new pro's enter the market too. Starters who would easily fall for the charms of Pentax, if the price is better then that of Canon and Nikon and the quality at least matches them.

Secondly, there's already an amount of pro's that shoot Pentax, especially with the 645D.

And finally, pro's are not constrained to one brand alone. We amateurs have to switch, because we can't justify shooting 3 brands of DSLR's. But pro's just need more and better tools. For a real life example: I personally know a pro Canon shooter, that uses the Pentax 50mm f1.2 on his Canon body, because the Canon equivalent of that lens sucks. He has expressed countless times that he would love to have a Pentax FF DSLR to mount it on, just for that lens alone!

not very different from K-5 but with a lot less digital wheels and pushbuttons, just a shutter wheel with co-axial ISO wheel, and aperture control just on the lens)

Less hardware buttons/wheels automatically means more menus to dig through. If anything, cameras like the Fuji x are very professional cameras that are limited by their controls that are like that of a point and shoot.

[Pål Jensen]

Considering the sucess of the DSLR a lower percentage than ever of SLR sold are sold to pros. Basically, it is not important except for brand glory.
Furthermore, the concept of a pro camera is more diffuse than ever in the digital age....

[alstauffer]

And Pentax could make a full frame camera with highly vintage look (sort of digital LX, not very different from K-5 but with a lot less digital wheels and pushbuttons, just a shutter wheel with co-axial ISO wheel, and aperture control just on the lens) to be presented along the three amigos (in kit with FA 43 limited).

As someone who just moved from K-x to K-7 and is very happy despite the arguably worse image quality, I don't think that fewer buttons and wheels is the right direction to go, especially for a camera meant to be a flagship/top-of-the-line model.

I do think a vintage look would be cool, sort of like what Olympus just did with their OM-D. Just keep that Marc Newson fellow away from it, IMO.

[eurostar]

Less buttons and wheels doesn't mean less control. An aperture ring on the lens, a ring for ISO and a ring for shutter on the camera are all what you need, set all of the three to A and you have total program, set aperture and scuter to A and you have SV, set ISO and Aperture to A and you have TV, set ISO and scuter to A and you have AV.

[starbase218]

Less buttons and wheels doesn't mean less control. An aperture ring on the lens, a ring for ISO and a ring for shutter on the camera are all what you need, set all of the three to A and you have total program, set aperture and scuter to A and you have SV, set ISO and Aperture to A and you have TV, set ISO and scuter to A and you have AV.

That covers basic exposure, but what about AF mode, drive mode, white balance, metering, just to name a few?

[monochrome]

That covers basic exposure, but what about AF mode, drive mode, white balance, metering, just to name a few?

What is an aperture ring on a lens?

[Quicksand]

What is an aperture ring on a lens?

On an old manual camera: a necessity.

On a modern camera: a silly anachronism.