Originally posted by nostatic Also size matters. Many want small/light. FF has a lower limit on size and weight. The other fact is that most dSLR owners never change lenses but instead just want something "better" or want to "look like a pro." We already have:
small p&s
larger "dslr" bridge p&s (usually ultrazoom)
fixed lens APS-C
interchangeable u4/3 (no mirror)
interchangeable 4/3 (SLR)
APS (1.6 crop)
APS (1.5 crop)
APS (1.3 crop)
FF
We soon will likely have interchangeable uAPS (no mirror). Will there be uFF as well? That ends up being a lot of confusion for the consumer (bad) but a lot of choice (good) but the manufacturers have to make decisions on what they're going to chase.
P&S will always be around. People want pocketable. Beyond that, all bets are off. I doubt that many would have predicted the success of the G1 and EP1. I think there is a lot of incentive to build more better/smaller cameras. I'm still not convinced about a full shift to FF for typical consumers unless they can make the bodies and glass smaller/lighter without losing the iq. Not many want to haul a 2+lb lens around just for taking snapshots. But we already know that to get the performance out of the FF chip you need really good glass. So we're back to the no free lunch thing again.
Sub-compact cameras don't sell as well as compact because of the optical trade-offs. People still like a decent "photo", and large screen TVs and computer monitors make marginal shots look awful. It is also why the capabilities of cameraphones are limited and will always be so. It's all bout the lens.
The sensor variety is good for the market, but lousy for long-term investments in glass. We've never had so many people taking such amazing photos as with the burst of DSLR activity in the last 3 years.
That said, DSLR sensor size will be determined by:
1) Body size, ergonomics and styling. It is #1 for the vast majority.
2) Low-light capabilities. 50% of photos are apparently snapped indoors. BAck to my comment above about lousy photos on the big screen.
3) Accessories. It needs a robust flash. Look at the grief many are giving the Oly PE. The flash accessory is awful and ugly.
4) Video. Convergence, It's here. It's staying. It's a HUGE part of the future of the DSLR. Don't like it? Tough. Buy into Leica.
5) Pro needs (relatively small market, but high margins). It's the tail that wags the dog, but it does not keep the chip fab in biz. Joe Consumer does.
6) In-camera editing/organizing. This is driven by markets where a PC in every home is not there and won't be. The camera is fungible, the photo will live in the cloud.
I agree, FF for Joe Consumer is not on the horizon. The superzoom sub-DSLR category will turn into the video camera as its primary function, with some decent photo capabilities, and maybe some tricks. The audio is one reason why. But for photos, DSLR's will eat their market almost completely (sorry Casio and Fuji).