I just think it's embarrassing how Canon's top of the line crop cameras are so far behind technologically to Sony's.
Can you please list the features that make a camera like the Sony A5100 so technologically superior to a top of the line Canon crop camera. Feel free to discuss advantages in areas like native lens selection, AF speed, frame rate, focus tracking of moving subjects, integration with a radio-controlled off-camera flash system, etc.
If you mean sensor and not camera, please say so. As I've said repeatedly, people don't buy bare silicon sensors to take pictures, they buy cameras.
Let me compare the 70D to the A6000.
I know I specifically mentioned the A5100 when talking about the sensor, but I was speaking generally of Sony's crop cameras compared to Canon's in terms of overall camera capability so I'll use the a6000 as my example.
The a6000 is much cheaper at $800 (actually $648 now on Amazon).
The a6000 is full metal compared to 70D being plastic.
The a6000 shoots up to 11fps compared to the 7fps on the 70D
The a6000 has a 179 focus points compared to 19 on the 70D
The a6000 shoots 60p video at full hd (note: also with better quality)
The a6000 has 100% viewfinder coverage compared to 98% on the 70D
On top of that, it has a superior sensor with more dynamic range, color sensitivity, and tonal range.
Sure Canon sells more, but it's probably due to the fact that Canon has better brand awareness with consumers.
Edit: Let me also add, I'm not saying Canon's cameras are terrible. In fact, they're quite capable of getting good results. It's just that Canon no longer seems to care about having the best image quality (at least sub $6k) and being on the cutting edge in terms of features and sensor, and to me it's disappointing, regardless of sales figures, that other companies can offer overall better sensors AND better cameras, at a cheaper price.
If you want to measure "better" by sales figures, go ahead but I'm just talking about my subjective views of "better."