No touchscreen and no wi-fi because the body is bombproof?
Touch Screens like Gorilla glass are stronger than anything on a DSLR today, you can also do covers on top that would still make it usable. WiFi is simple and does not need anything much to get it going good (look how small the Nikon WIFI dongle is). You have plenty of antenna areas like around the top screen or the battery and card doors or even the shutter button has plenty of room. Actually it would not be that hard to do dual-band WIFI, one wifi signal sends and another receives making live view smooth and fast.
I have to give Canon credit for the wifi and touch screen DSLRs they have out now, they are not bad and at least they're doing it in the camera unlike Nikon. Nikon makes you buy a dongle, if the camera was done correct the first time it shouldn't need a dongle for something we have on a simple thermostat or oven today.
I would love to see how a DIGIC chip compares to the stuff on smartphones today and if it would make a huge difference in buffer speeds. I know both are based off ARM designs..I need to look into that.
I keep reading here how tough smartphone glass is compared to DSLR glass. It's stated repeatedly as a fact, but I'm not sure if I believe that statement. I don't know anything about Gorilla glass, so I'm not really able to say with certainty.
That being said however, I have see quite a few iPhones and Samsung (and other brands) smartphones with screens that were all but shattered after fairly trivial drops. (Possibly this is a generational thing and the older models, from even a couple years ago were not as tough as the latest?) On the other hand, I've watched videos of various Canon and Nikon cameras (and not 1 series or D3/D4's either--semi-pro models like 5D and 7D) being dropped down cement stairs repeatedly without damaged screens--and still functional after the "test." Sure there was an element of showmanship and theatre to these drop tests--but they nonetheless illustrate a point.
Is there any actual factual comparison between the glass mounted on premium DSLR's like the 1DX/D4S and the latest screens mounted to DSLR's? It's very easy to just make a statement that smartphone glass is tougher than anything mounted to a DSLR. It'd be interesting to see a comparison.
If I sound doubtful, it's just that I see plenty of dubious statements when it comes to phone vs camera. The notion that cell phone cameras render all other cameras, up to and including entry level DSLR's and CSC's as obsolete is simply silly and I've seen statements to that effect. It's even silly to say that the cell phone camera has killed all point and shoot cameras -- Superzooms (such as the SX50) and premium compacts (like the Sony RX and Canon G series) are holding their own. Even the disappearance of basic compacts has to do more with the convenience than capability. Smartphone cameras are quite amazing, but they lack optical zoom, and are thus limited to shooting wide angle, or delving into digital zoom.
Well anyways, that last bit was a bit of a tangent to the principal point, but it's one that's been on my mind! LOL