Full Frame - A wish list

This is purely a wish list on what we would like to have in a Pentax FF camera. We know nothing is going to happen (yet?), as Pentax are dedicated to APS-C. But, we still hope.
At the moment, there are three makes of FF DSLR's (ignoring Leica, which is a rangefinder), but each does have their compromises, which we could think Pentax could address.

So, before, my Pentax FF wishlist, lets look at what I think is the shortcomings of the others.

Nikon D700 - It's "only" 12MP. No body SR and Low Light performance is last generation.
Nikon D3s - Again "only" 12MP, no body SR and for some people a bit big!
Nikon D3x - Low Light Performance, no body SR fairly slow FPS. And again a bit big!
Canon 5D mk2 - Appalling sealing, poor AF, no body SR, very low FPS.
Canon 1Ds mk3 - Poor low light performance, no body SR, big.
Sony A850/A900 - Poor performance, low light performance, handling very low FPS.

So, what would I want from a Pentax FF
Here we go

Full sealing
Decent FPS
Fast more than 11 AF points
Dual card slots - either SD or CF (both have their advantages)
big big big buffer
Excellent ISO performance
in-body SR
The unique Pentax controls of TAv and Sv.
Better flash sync of 1/250
Around 25MP sensor.
Smallest body practical. So must take into consideration FF sensor, Large buffer, SR and dual slots. So we are talking of something bigger than the K10D/K20D and certainly the K-5.

Oh, and yes reintroduction of all the FA* lenses, modified for SDM and optimised for digital but thats another thread.

Could it happen? Well yes, the tech is there.
Will it happen? Don't know. Pentax are currently optimised for APS-C, and current performance show that they out-perform FF cameras in certain circumstances. Plus, Pentax want to grow their existing system at the moment, and a high performing FF camera might step on the toes of the 645D - certainly in IQ.

This is a bit of fun. What would you want.

If keeping the camera small means dispensing with in body SR, so be it. Excellent ISO performance is key. 16 MP would be plenty.

We live in hope.
I'm amused that people think APS-C can out perform FF for IQ. I haven't seen one that will do that but in due course "new" APS-C will out perform legacy FF. It's like claiming 35mm will out perform 120 format - bigger sensor/neg will perform better all other things being equal.
My list is similar to yours. Obviously IQ is tops. FPS? 5 would do. Mp? The D700 does a great job with 12Mp. so less than 20 would be fine. Large pixels improve DR. I would add a wish for a large bright viewfinder.

At this stage in the game, any full frame camera would have to offer something very different. Just producing one with great image quality isn't enough. Why would we ditch our APS-C cameras for something bigger, heavier, more expensive (probably) and needing a whole new set of lens purchases?

My feeling is there would have be something very exceptional about such a camera to make the market place jump up and take notice.

I think Pentax should make small size the USP, tailoring it to the FA ltds. And make it reasonably affordable. But if you can afford the full set of FA ltds you can probably afford to splash out on a digital body that truly does them justice.

Maybe, although people stretch themselves to get something special and it doesn't necessarily follow that there's anything more in the pot at any given time.

Hard to judge as people's priorties are different. One person might spend a fortune on a lens, someone else think that was a total waste of money and buy a car instead.....and so on.

And then some enthusiasts opt for a 645d. Fabulous camera but... Overkill perhaps, for most of us. Going to FF is more logical as you can share many lenses across the systems.

Here's the FA31 on a full frame canon

http://lh5.ggpht.com/stevenlins/SDrhLy5LMLI/AAAAAAAAFcI/CqG5Ym6Pms4/s800/IMG_949...

I think to get that 'look' on Apsc you'd need a 20mm f1.0 lens, which hopefully puts into context any concerns about FF being too bulky.

Looks like a girl on a bridge to me.....

Cunningly disguised!

More images and shots of the unholy union here.

http://stevenlins.blogspot.com/2008/05/5d-pentax-fa-31-le.html

The OP wants a full frame yet poo poos most of the options available!!!

If the D700 & D3x's low light are last generation then what is the best low light option for ff??? As I understand one of the reasons to go FF is for the low light capabilities, are you saying that APS -C low light capabilities are now up to ff standard???

If I was to upgrade for anything it would be a D3 alas the £10,000 needed to completely swap over is way out of my budget

Cost is definitely part of the proble, and that applies equally well to the 645D.

Most of us seem to chicken out once costs get beyond about £1000, some at a lot less than that.

A professional need is one thing, but as an amateur desire it can get a bit daunting.

Not according to DxO (and no I don't use such data before buying cameras). The sports low light ISO for the K5 is 1162 and 2303 for the D700. The D7000 is up at 1167 which is the same as the K5 for the same sensor. So I'll be keeping my D700 for a few more years.

I was at one point too enthusiastic, wanting Pentax to launch a FF but no more. I've had FF for over 2 years and never looked back. If Pentax do ever launch FF, I'll consider it just to use the Ltd's properly.

Best regards

Well that's what I thought...

I just don't see the point of a wish list for a full frame body??? If you need a full frame body then get one, threads like this just seem pointless to me...

Well, as K10D pointed out, Pentax has some great FF lenses that are among the reasons many shoot Pentax. It would be great to have a FF camera to use them with. What's wrong with wishing it?

But thats not the only reason he wants FF

Oh, and yes reintroduction of all the FA* lenses, modified for SDM and optimised for digital but thats another thread.
Pentax are currently optimised for APS-C, and current performance show that they out-perform FF cameras in certain circumstances.

So not only does he want research & development into a FF body he also wants reintroduction of ALL the FA* lenses, how ridiculous is that??? The factories that made those lenses no longer exists I certainly doubt the tools still exist... Its just pure fantasist, it won't happen... Ever!!

To go FF with full lens development we must be looking at at least 3 years research & development then plant building by which time something else would have come along...