Come up with a lackluster camera.
I guess it all comes down to your definition of 'lacklustre'.
I have Olympus mirrorless and Panasonic mirrorless as smaller portable versions of my Canon so I know from experience about different menu systems, useability, ergonomics and how those meld into my experience of photography. I am frustrated by the lag in the camera waking up and have missed several 'grab shots' because of the split second it takes for the MILC cameras to wake up, the EVF is difficult for focus tracking a fast moving subject, the reliance on menus instead of buttons I find a pain (yes, I know about quick menus etc...but that does not change my opinion), and the shortfall in AF for what I am most interested in (wildlife and birds in flight). But I like the WYSIWYG viewfinder. I like the compact size (but they are MFT, after all). And there a host of other pros and cons - but when push comes to shove I take my MILCs out as convenient tools, but I look forward to taking photos when I take the DSLR: it is in a different emotional bracket in that respect and I have read a few pros who say quite openly that the Sony for them takes the fun out of photography so it seems I am not alone. Interface to me is just as important as the fact it takes pictures - and it has been widely stated that Sony has proven incompetent at this for years (they are getting there but not yet) and for me it is
one of the most basic aspects of a tool but they ignore it as though it does not matter.
I don't rely on photography for a living so all the hype about Sony sensor allowing you screw up an image and still recover it does not mean a lot to me. Nice to have, but not a driver for me to sell everything and move over.
So I do not find the Canons 'lackluster' at all.
Overprice it when compared to features offered on similar products from competitors and then sell them by giving huge rebates,
A poor criticism - name me a manufacturer that does not offer rebates. In fact, Sony have had a recent 10-15% permanent reduction in their prices (in the UK) so it seems that your comment can be turned on Sony as well.
Honestly speaking I feel CIDF are correct at least on this one “Canon’s strategy is working” so why bother even competing.
The thing is, of all those things that sound so wonderful are thing that very few people will ever really use, and fewer still will use regularly. The one issue that keeps coming up is the sensor and that is one area where Canon have only recently caught up with the 5DIV and the differences are now small.
So take the sensor difference as matter of fact. Ignore a lot of the functions that arise from it being mirrorless (focus peaking, magnified view in the VF for manual focussing, WYSIWYG viewfinder), then what functions of the Sony actually make you think 'I would find that really useful in what I do'.
There are many critics of Canon who want them to 'compete at all levels', not because they use the functions they read about but to give them a warm and fuzzy feeling that Canon is dong something.