[RonMexico]

Forget the speculations over whether Pentax will release a full frame DSLR in the near future.

What improvements would you like to see, or do you think are possible in the meantime?

I can't think of many. I think Pentax could:

Improve autofocus speed
Increase the number of autofocus points
Autofocus video (although I'm not sure how hard it is to do, and how much added cost that would need).

I guess some people might want even higher ISO range, if they're shooting in some cave in Sri Lanka or something.

[raymeedc]

"Uncripple" the mount (& the M42 adapter) to allow me to use my older manual lenses as they were intended to be used.

P.S. - An ice dispenser would be nice for those very hot summer days.

[Boris]

1. Produce a camera with 8MP sensor with pixels proportionally large, but use modern circuitry and algorithms to rival performance of FF competitors.
2. Produce a camera without built-in flash, AF, shake reduction, video, auto level, etc. Make it small and light (as far as flange distance dictates). Make it cheap. May be fit there the 8MP sensor from above. In other words, regain the once ultimate nickname - "Japanese Leica".

[kenyee]

improved predictive AF (which means more AF points since to do it right, you need more focus points to track movement across the frame)
1080p video
add tethering back (I refuse to upgrade to the K7 because of this)-:
I had a whole list of trivial firmware changes in the Dear Pentax thread which would have cost nothing in hardware too :-P

[Lowell Goudge]

In no particular order

- At least one model with TTL flash so you can have flash photography with Non A lenses.
- Flash sync (both leading and trailing curtain) at 1/250th
- Continued development of sensors in the 12-14 MP range with bettter high ISO.
- some means of entering max and min aperture of K mount lenses for real Av mode, and ability to use P-TTL acceepting that small aperture performance might be a little off
- for the purists, screw mount and uncrippled K mount versions (lowest priority)
- ability to add a TC factor for SR focal length and exposure correction.
- optional pentax split image
- ability to add exposure correction factor/curve on a lens by lens basis
- compressed RAW

On the documentation side, in the manuals an explanation or images showing the impact of all settings, and the range of effectiveness

For the software (PC photo editing) all jpeg conversion adjustments mirroring those of the camera

[ytterbium]

-Tethering capability (Preferably some standard, like TWAIN or WDM image capture)*
-Option to disable Dark Frame Subtraction,
-Option to select AF mode (SDM/no-SDM/Auto select for scene/lens),
-Separate AF assist LED (flash strobe is slow, bright, wide and annoying),
-Future AA-battery cameras with proprietary Li-Ion capability.
-keep the mega-pixels down, 10 is far enough.

*This is one of the reasons i bought into Pentax system and picked up DSLR in first place, because at the time, Pentax and Canon had such capability (Which my P&S lacked).

[kenyee]

-Separate AF assist LED (flash strobe is slow, bright, wide and annoying),
-Future AA-battery cameras with proprietary Li-Ion capability.
-keep the mega-pixels down, 10 is far enough.

Aren't these already available in the K-7 and KX?

[Supernaut]

- 100%, 1.2x magnification VF
- From ground up new AF system, predictive and with options as D3(x)
- Pre mounted split screen
- Availibility of variants 14Mp or 8Mp in same camera body design, not 2x cost to have 2 variants available built around one body.
- Keep the form factor of the K-7! Best on market and differentiate as an serious option to FF if the points above are fullfilled.

[Marc Sabatella]

1. Produce a camera with 8MP sensor with pixels proportionally large, but use modern circuitry and algorithms to rival performance of FF competitors.

That wouldn't work. It's something of a myth that noise is proportional to pixel size primarily - it is far more affect by *sensor* size. Changing number of pixels on the same size sensor has very little effect on the amount of noise when comparing images at the same size (which is why, when comparing images at the same size, the 6MP APS-C DSLR's do *not* outperform those with higher pixel counts), but increasing sensor size has a very direct effect. An 8MP APS-C camera would have less resolution but no less noise than today's higher resolution APS-C cameras. Unless of course that "modern circuity and algorithms" put them over the edge - but those same techniques could also be applied to 12MP or 14MP sensors.

[Andrew Faires]

Just off the top of my head and in the same body as the k-7:
-improve the AF-C
-Give me absolute perfection at ISO 100
-Give me absolute perfection at....wait for it.....ISO 50
-Give me near perfection at ISO 25
-Keep the FPS and so on, the same....they work very well for me.
-In-camera HDR in RAW
-I don't honestly care if MP's go up or down. Anything between 10 & 15 MP is fine, so long as we're getting the absolute best sensor for the job.
-A DA 10, 11 or 12mm f/5.6 limited lens that's weather-sealed (you proved you could do it with the new 100mm macro) and no retractable lens-hoods that protrude beyond the end of the lens when retracted....keep this puppy with between a 49-58mm filter thread. Give it 8 or 9 rounded aperture blades, astounding distortion control, sharpness, colour, contrast and every other quality that sets the limited series of lenses apart....in otherwords, make this the perfect landscape lens.....in fact, I'd happily forgo all the camera improvements to get a lens like this!

[pcarfan]

-Better AF-C with a much larger buffer
-High iso performance (sorry)
-Magnified viewfinder (Is this possible, or does the sensor have to be larger).

Other than wide angle view and dof, these make FF redundant.

I absolutely agree with keeping the form factor the same as the K-7, what a marvellous piece.

[Lowell Goudge]

That wouldn't work. It's something of a myth that noise is proportional to pixel size primarily - it is far more affect by *sensor* size. Changing number of pixels on the same size sensor has very little effect on the amount of noise when comparing images at the same size (which is why, when comparing images at the same size, the 6MP APS-C DSLR's do *not* outperform those with higher pixel counts), but increasing sensor size has a very direct effect. An 8MP APS-C camera would have less resolution but no less noise than today's higher resolution APS-C cameras. Unless of course that "modern circuity and algorithms" put them over the edge - but those same techniques could also be applied to 12MP or 14MP sensors.

Marc

I think your response here is a little misleading.

One part of noise, specifically in the sensor, is actual electronic noise.

Electronic noise in the sensors is due to the impact of dark current (i.e. random unintentional current) in the sensor, as a relation of the total light reading. The smaller the sensor the bigger the impact of dark current

There is also "noise" caused by the amplification of very low levels, which introduces errors these cannot be negated, but bigger sensors have more capacity and therefore need ledd amplification.

As a result, less bigger receptors will inherently have less noise than higher pixel densities of smaller receptors.

the reason you don';t see a 1:1 comparison is that technologies also chance over time, and the ASP C sensors specifically have advanced a lot in terms of maintaining the good noise characteristics while at the same time increasing pixed density.

A fairer comparison would be perhaps taking a bridge camera with a 10 x 8 mm sensor at 5 mp, to the 6 MP sensor of the *istD of the same era, with its 24 x 16 mm sensor.

the 5 MP bridge camera has the same noise at 400 ISO as the *istD at 3200.

[Boris]

Let us not hijack the thread and pull it towards noise/pixels size discussion. After all, we were asked to list what we would like to have. I listed my opinion to the best of my knowledge. I trust there is another thread where noise vs pixel size are discussed, and honestly - I'd rather stay away from there.

[jboyde]

Let us not hijack the thread and pull it towards noise/pixels size discussion. After all, we were asked to list what we would like to have. I listed my opinion to the best of my knowledge. I trust there is another thread where noise vs pixel size are discussed, and honestly - I'd rather stay away from there.

I'll oblige.

More choices of peripherals for Pentax, like having Cybersyncs and Radio Poppers work through P-TTL. I'm not sure if its because other companies don't see the need or is Pentax keeping this kind of property to themselves, like not allowing Tamron (it was Tamron, right?) to sell their 12-24mm lens in a Pentax mount.

[Alfisti]

Having a 20D it's such a major step up from the 100D that a lot of my boxes have been ticked. Some of th eproblems of the 20D have been addressed in the K7 such as the size and the impact the lighting has on AF (namely tungsten).

Honestly, just improve the sensor in the K7 and i'd be more than happy, an articulated LCD (or at leats a sister model with it) woul dbe really nice for us macro shooters.