Originally posted by Rondec Everything you say is true. I do think as well, that Canon and Nikon and Sony would like to sell photographers the most expensive camera that they would be willing to buy. That usually means trying to get them into full frame cameras if possible.
But to the initial question, APS-C is here for a long time (no one can say forever about anything tech related).
Good points.
I'd modify the goal slightly to say that they want to sell the
most profitable camera (not the most expensive camera) that photographers would be willing to buy. Camera makers would rather sell a $1000 camera that cost $500 to make ($500 total gross profit) than sell a $1100 camera that cost $700 to make (only $400 total gross profit). That pushes camera makers to look to cut costs on design and components (e.g., substitute an APS-C sensor for an FF one). Moreover, camera makers want to ensure that photographers who might be willing to buy a $2000 camera don't buy the $1000 camera. That pushes camera makers to look to create a very strong differentiation between camera on the price spectrum (e.g., only offer FF sensors on the high-end and only offer APS-C sensors on the low-end).
The goal is also weighted by volume. Camera makers with big marketing budgets and heavy retail presence need to keep unit sales high or it all falls apart. High-volume sales of lower-priced products for people that refuse to spend $$$$ on a camera help cover R&D, marketing, and retail costs.