[BigMackCam]

I gave up trying to use cable USB transfer because of the comparatively slow speed (USB3 might be an improvement, though), so I'm not so sure about wireless being any faster than card swapping.

USB 3.x is a huge improvement. I have an external hard drive for backup, and occasionally plug it into one of my laptop's USB 2 ports by mistake. Performance-wise, it's unrecognisable compared to when I run it from the USB 3.0 port... Totally different

My preference for wireless is more to reduce wear and tear on the camera's card ports and door... plus, every time I open that door, there's more chance of dust and debris getting around the seal and compromising WR (until I clean it again). Minor points, but my vote goes to wireless because of this.

[RobA_Oz]

USB 3.x is a huge improvement. I have an external hard drive for backup, and occasionally plug it into one of my laptop's USB 2 ports by mistake. Performance-wise, it's unrecognisable compared to when I run it from the USB 3.0 port... Totally different

My preference for wireless is more to reduce wear and tear on the camera's card ports and door... plus, every time I open that door, there's more chance of dust and debris getting around the seal and compromising WR (until I clean it again). Minor points, but my vote goes to wireless because of this.

I can't but agree on the speeds of USB 2 and 3, although I've experienced quite a deal of speed difference using various devices of both standards, not necessarily in my cameras. I imagine the difference arises from the makers' implementations.

Nonetheless, I take your point on the matter of sealing. Wireless transfer is, of course, a lot more convenient, too, provided the speed is appropriate, and neither the Pentax FLUcard nor the K-1 WiFi are in the right street for RAW transfers (I doubt they're in the right suburb, actually).

[beholder3]

I added the two new suggestions. Please keep in mind this here is asking for hardware stuff only. Certain suggestions are more on the firmware side of things.
It really seems that there is not very much on the hardware side which would be a major improvement versus current cameras other than "a little more here and there".

[h4yn0nnym0u5e]

+1 for touchscreen - the existing maze of buttons, 4-way control and e-dials is just horrible...

I'd add a request for anything that can improve the ease and accuracy of MF when using the OVF. That could include a built-in (zoom?) magnifier, focus peaking overlay, and ability to fine tune the registration of the focus screen with the sensor: the optical equivalent of AF fine adjust. Split image screen would be great, too, if it didn't interfere too much with metering.

Elimination of shutter shock would be good, too.

Cheers

Jonathan

[BigMackCam]

Although highly unlikely, I'd really love to see an non-crippled mount that can read the aperture ring position on K and M lenses.

Alternatively, a feature to automatically carry out stop-down "green button" metering on half press of the shutter button.

[Dartmoor Dave]

The ultimate development will be the fully autonomous camera that you just hang around your neck and forget about, leaving it to select its own shots automatically with "perfect" composition and exposure every time. Then people will be free to talk about nothing other than who has the latest, greatest gear, and that bothersome old matter of learning actual skills will be history.


(Sorry folks, I seem to be feeling a bit cranky this morning.)

[BigMackCam]

The ultimate development will be the fully autonomous camera that you just hang around your neck and forget about, leaving it to select its own shots automatically with "perfect" composition and exposure every time. Then people will be free to talk about nothing other than who has the latest, greatest gear, and that bothersome old matter of learning actual skills will be history.


(Sorry folks, I seem to be feeling a bit cranky this morning.)

Google are already working on it, Dave

Time for another cup of hot, milky tea, my friend

[GUB]

You want hardware - how about a dedicated Pentax produced LCD viewfinder loupe that attaches professionally (removable) to the body rather than all this evf stuff.
And you meantion Iso IQ then how about retaining Iso invariance rather than losing it for some other mediocre gains as in the a9. And with it creating an Iso-less camera with corrected sub-images on the screen for chimping.

[photoptimist]

In case I missed it in the original list, let's have all - or most, at least - buttons configurable to different functions.

And, as a high priority, a well-placed and prominent button for back-button focusing... something the thumb falls naturally onto

Yes!

And wouldn't it be cool if the text labelling on the button or dial changed to show what the button or dial was doing?

There's now tiny OLED displays being used to make reconfigurable keyboards where the tops of the keycaps can change dynamically. Or the e-Ink technology used in Amazon Kindle paperwhite displays could be miniaturized to show a label or setting.

Imagine an e-dial that shows the selected shutterspeed, aperture, ISO, or ±EV setting.

[jddwoods]

I used to be a luddite where this was concerned, but I have to agree... fast wireless transfer would be fantastic. I dread to think how much wear I cause to my K-3's "Slot 1" (and my laptop's reader) by taking the cards in and out

I do not transfer files from camera to computer this way. I use the cable connection from my camera to my computer but I wonder how much opening up and closing that flap on the camera will compromise weather resistance. So far on my K-5 and K-3 bodies, I am not observing any wear but it doesn't take much wear for WR to be compromised. On the computer side, I leave the USB cables plugged in all of the time so there is no potential wear stress on that end.

[stevebrot]

I am thinking "less is more." Something like a digital LX, but with autofocus.

What he said, only skip the AF and provide a decent optical viewfinder capable of fine focus. Oh, and if it all possible, add a non-crippled mount and K-cup support.


Steve

[stevebrot]

My preference for wireless is more to reduce wear and tear on the camera's card ports and door...

The trade-off, of course, is battery life.


Steve

[Ron Boggs]

Stacking system in-camera is one of my triggers for a new body...some others are starting to offer it. I'd like to see selectable number of images in stack with the software controlling the auto focus to shoot the whole stack...set near and far focus spots and step back...Helicon sure works great...same thing in-camera would be high on my list...if it actually made the focus changes too--wow! Not sure any of that counts as hardware--connecting stacking software to focus mechanism count?

[stevebrot]

Stacking system in-camera is one of my triggers for a new body...some others are starting to offer it.

As long as the stacking provides the same resolution and image quality as regular mode and is available for both JPEG and RAW. Some systems leverage their video mode for stacking.


Steve

[Kunzite]

Google are already working on it, Dave

Time for another cup of hot, milky tea, my friend

Actually you could stay at home, the camera will drive itself to a self chosen location, decide on a composition and take pictures.
But then, it will also hold the copyright

Regarding USB, I'd suggest an USB-C port, rather than the clumsier micro USB 3 port.

How about... an evolution of the SLR concept - by combining a variable transmission mirror (we discussed a Ricoh Imaging patent a while ago) and on-sensor PDAF?
Think of the classic SLR system, but on which:
- the main mirror is fixed, and with variable transmission
- there is no dedicated PDAF system under the mirror, and in consequence no secondary mirror to divert light to it
- light will thus be split between the OVF and the sensor (with the option of reducing/disabling the reflection of light to the OVF during the exposure, and perhaps autofocus)
Besides mechanical complexity, this arrangement would also help with video and frame rates. And, of course, with AF points coverage (more difficult to do on a dedicated PDAF system).

I'd also be happy to see any new idea Ricoh Imaging would have, like that other patent about increasing the AF point coverage through a new type of secondary mirror.
Yes, I'm for improving the basic functions, first and foremost