Originally posted by punkrachmaninov it is all just getting started, aps-c is next after m4/3... you guys can pretend all you want, but i see the numbers reflecting a trend that pentax cannot afford to ignore...
I don't think anyone's pretending, here - I'm certainly not. That would suggest we know the writing's on the wall but don't want to admit it. Instead, we just have different opinions
Originally posted by punkrachmaninov why do you think sony is so willing to rest on their 67% share of the full frame mirrorless market? let the others fail. it works, at least for awhile.
Sony has the advantage of of being the only
mature full-frame MILC platform at present. As such, the lens catalogue is well populated (for a long time it wasn't thus) and the company has had plenty of time to establish a user base who've already invested in FE glass and system accessories.
As for resting on it's 67% share of full frame mirrorless market (I haven't verified that number - I'm taking you at your word), it really shouldn't. Before too long, Canon and Nikon will have their native mirrorless lens ranges fleshed out - and then Sony will have serious competition at the high end of full frame mirrorless, which it never had before. Perhaps it'll develop better features and performance to compete, or maybe it'll go down the pricing route? Of course, it'll still have a fairly unique proposition at the lower (older) end of the model range based largely on price, and in the APS-C mirrorless market with cameras using the same native E-mount. But even that could be a temporary situation... Who knows what Nikon and Canon will develop next, and Panasonic are due to join the melee...
And then there's little old Pentax... standing to one side, watching the big boys fight amongst themselves while it slowly and methodically develops products that cater first and foremost to its existing user base, and attracting a few defectors from the other brands based on a favourable quality / features / price value-proposition.
Originally posted by punkrachmaninov two is enough. F-I-R-M-W-A-R-E and long product generation is the future.
It's an interesting idea, but a tricky one... Firmware would need to be a revenue-generating product in its own right - either on a discrete ("pay $xxx for the latest feature set") or subscription ("pay $x per month and get every new feature as and when it is released") basis. Even then, there will come a point three or four years after initial release where the review sites, press and buying public will question the sense in buying "old" technology that, despite having new features due to firmware updates, still has an older sensor and other hardware limitations that can't be improved upon simply through firmware...
I cite as an example the Yi M1 mirrorless. Many thought that the company's commitment to firmware updates would translate to regular and significant incremental improvements over the original release... But, while firmware updates kept coming (albeit less frequently than hoped), that camera is (and always will be) increasingly limited by the sensor, hardware architecture and physical interface