Originally posted by tram57 Probably won't get FF with a small camera, or a cost most can afford. Why wouldn't folks want a 24MP camera with resolution equivalent to D600, maybe higher if no AA filter, plus high ISO noise performance same or near same as D600, and better than any other APS-C camera including d7100? Maintainence of a small size, these peformance features, and the ability to continue to use all the DA limited lenses and DA* lenses would justify a price slightly higher than d7100
Cannikin's right that APS-H is kind of more of a bigger APS-C than a trimmed-down FF in some important ways. The size advantages might not be that significant, compared to what else can be done to make DSLRs more the size of film SLRs, ie, shrinking the electronics that make up so much bulk, etc. Think about volume of things rather than area. A full-frame ME Super film body can fit in a blazer pocket with a lovely viewfinder to boot.
More than that, it'll be full-frame first because that's what's going to *sell* compared to designing around APS-H. It's what people want, and if Pentax is gonna go with a whole new format, that'll likely be what it is.
Mind you, I'm someone who really doesn't mind APS-C in many respects, and mostly would want the full-frame viewfinder out of FF. If somewhere down the line it made sense for Pentax to put an APS-H sensor in the likes of a K-5 or K20D body, it might actually suit me quite well on a few counts, be a nice little boost in finder size over the APS-C for a prosumer range at some point, but it's not going to satisfy those who just need/want full frame. It'd have to make sense to do all that separate engineering, though. (If Pentax tries another K-mount mirrorless, that might actually be an interesting combo, though it might not help my better-finder desires: what it *would* do is make an interesting way to use smaller lenses like the Limiteds on a pretty small body.