[richard0170]

Right this is a silly post - it is a wish list of what I personally would like Pentax's next camera to be. You will have your own preferences. I would look forward to reading them. I know full well Pentax would not make my dream camera, but I still can dream,,,,,,,
I would like a Pentax ME Super D.
It would be full frame but only 20-24 mp. I do not want huge file sizes, but I do want excellent low light capabilities
It would not do video, so no one could criticise it for having poor video
It would be properly compact with a big lovely viewfinder like the original ME Super
It would of course need to be slightly bigger to accommodate the batteries, but they would not be in an ugly lump on the side in a grip, but be elongated and run underneath the base plate a la Contax 137
It need not be AF, as I want to use all that old PK glass and I think that would help to keep the cost down! So no one could criticise its poor AF tracking!
It would pretty much look like an update of an ME Super, MX, LX, K or Spottie model.
It would be properly put together and be robust and reliable
It would look gorgeous and be highly desirable and come in at about the same price as Fuji XT3

[reh321]

Right this is a silly post - it is a wish list of what I personally would like Pentax's next camera to be. You will have your own preferences. I would look forward to reading them. I know full well Pentax would not make my dream camera, but I still can dream,,,,,,,
I would like a Pentax ME Super D.
It would be full frame but only 20-24 mp. I do not want huge file sizes, but I do want excellent low light capabilities
It would not do video, so no one could criticise it for having poor video
It would be properly compact with a big lovely viewfinder like the original ME Super
It would of course need to be slightly bigger to accommodate the batteries, but they would not be in an ugly lump on the side in a grip, but be elongated and run underneath the base plate a la Contax 137
It need not be AF, as I want to use all that old PK glass and I think that would help to keep the cost down! So no one could criticise its poor AF tracking!
It would pretty much look like an update of an ME Super, MX, LX, K or Spottie model.
It would be properly put together and be robust and reliable
It would look gorgeous and be highly desirable and come in at about the same price as Fuji XT3

Take AF and Video off my KP, and it would basically what you're asking for. It is slightly larger than my Super Program {essentially same size as ME class}, with same look and feel, has nice viewfinder, makes excellent 24mp images {even in low light}, and is less expensive than XT3.

added: people keep telling me that a FF body would need to be larger - but one can hope

[Caribe]

Wow! If a FF sensor could fit in a KP, without the video or the flash...🤔. While
I was reading the op's comment my reaction was exactly as reh321.

[Wasp]

If Leica can sell a digital camera without a screen on the back, surely there's a market for a Pentax DSLR with no video capability.

The thing is, the CPU and associated hardware in the KP already has the ability to do video and autofocus. Developing a new CPU without this will cost money. The end product will be targeted at a niche market. Not a lot of sales to recoup the R&D money, then. That means more expensive, sadly.

Perhaps a KP with no screen will fit the bill. The camera can be a bit thinner as well as cheaper. How much cheaper, I don't know.

Foregoing a screen doesn't mean that you need a computer to replay your shots. You simply open an app on your smartphone that connects to the camera via WiFi. That's how the Leica rolls.

As for me, I would like a GR III with a K mount and an EVF please.

[boriscleto]

If Leica can sell a digital camera without a screen on the back, surely there's a market for a Pentax DSLR with no video capability.

The video is included because it is a feature of the Milbeaut image processor.

A DSLR with no screen? It would not be cheaper, it would be more expensive.

[Ash]

Richard, one of your points on having smaller files on a FF is currently capable on the K-1: there is a menu-customisable option on file size, from 36Mp to 22Mp to 12Mp to 2Mp (Ricoh Imaging | Pentax K-1 Mark II DSLR Camera (Body Only) Black).
Having no video would cripple its sales. The good thing about the camera is that video is a separate dial option, and you won't even notice you have video if you never want to use it on the camera.
It's hard having a FF dSLR the size of the ME that would have all the capabilities of the K-1, and smaller camera would mean weight balance may take a back seat, making camera-lens combinations less comfortable to hand-hold.
No AF? No problem, flip the switch to MF and all your nicely dampened AF lenses like the DFA and DA primes work just the way you want them to. Not too many systems allow for legacy MF lenses that are truly dampened to be used seamlessly on modern cameras.

[twilhelm]

The KP with a full frame sensor would be quite interesting.

[Angel Perez]

Waiting for the K-3 mark III. Just build on the greatness. Keep the same amount of megapixels, higher buffer rate, faster autofocus, and better low light performance. I love to shoot the performing arts and another stop would give me more flexibilty. Better video wouldn't hurt although it's not a priority for what I shoot.

[torashi]

And split/micro prism collar focusing. Aperture window would be cool, too.

[totsmuyco]

No! It won't just be full frame. It will have to be 2 cameras. Super ME-DF for full frame and Super ME-DA for ApSC.

[ProfessorBuzz]

LX-D would do it for me, if I can use all my LX viewfinders. Or I'd just buy the new versions.

[Merv-O]

I simply want a KP ii with more K-1 ii features that would turn it into a true flagship--the KP is already a superstar (it's AF & low light ISO lints are incredible), but the K-3/ii apologists who initially rejected it, need a little more 'schmaltz' to be convinced....as for me one month with the KP has made me a believer...

[Wasp]

A DSLR with no screen? It would not be cheaper, it would be more expensive.

It is one less component but the market would be smaller, so you are probably right. This approach seems to work for Leica.

[noblepa]

If Leica can sell a digital camera without a screen on the back, surely there's a market for a Pentax DSLR with no video capability.

The thing is, the CPU and associated hardware in the KP already has the ability to do video and autofocus. Developing a new CPU without this will cost money. The end product will be targeted at a niche market. Not a lot of sales to recoup the R&D money, then. That means more expensive, sadly.

Perhaps a KP with no screen will fit the bill. The camera can be a bit thinner as well as cheaper. How much cheaper, I don't know.

Foregoing a screen doesn't mean that you need a computer to replay your shots. You simply open an app on your smartphone that connects to the camera via WiFi. That's how the Leica rolls.

As for me, I would like a GR III with a K mount and an EVF please.

Leica is a special case. They have a history of selling wonderfully engineered cameras and lenses. For decades, they have been the pinnacle of quality, both in design and manufacture.

However, what works for Leica doesn't necessarily work for other manufacturers. People pay a lot of money for that little red dot on the front of the camera.

No one else sells a true rangerfinder camera. Leica does. That doesn't mean there is a large market for rangefinders. There is a market for LEICAs.

Leica sold a digital camera that was incapable of taking color photographs. Would that fly in the wider market? I doubt it.

Comparing Leica to the general digital camera market is like asking why Chevrolet can't build a car with the same features and quality as a Bentley or Rolls Royce. Just as with a Bentley, a good portion of the price you pay for a Leica is for the exclusivity and the bragging rights.

[pentax360]

Atomic battery, waterproof to 300 meters, 4D capable video with optional smelo-vision, body weighs less than 1 oz, heated handgrip.