unfocused said:Let's face it. When, and if, it makes economic sense for Canon (or Nikon) to produce a full-frame mirrorless camera they will do so. Companies are in the business of making money and that means they are interested in making products that their research shows will sell in sufficient quantities to offset development costs and make a profit.
Let's not assume companies always does the right thing, history is full of examples of the opposite. Also market research is not an exact science, ppl might not even know what they want before they see it.
unfocused said:For a different take on the mirrorless debate, I'd suggest reading the interview with a Fuji executive that was referenced in a recent Photo Rumors post. The shortened version is that Fuji looked at both APS-C and Full Frame and concluded that APS-C was the best format for mirrorless. I'm not saying they are right and Sony is wrong, but their reasoning seems sound to me – the size advantages of mirrorless essentially disappear once you start developing full frame bodies and lenses and the difference in quality between APS-C and Full Frame is not that great.
Let's not assume that ppl buy mirrorless for size either, many don't. Also wrong to assume that those who do buy it for size will want use the same f1.4 primes and f2.8 zooms as many do on DSLRs.
unfocused said:Finally there is this: constantly posting the same complaint on a camera forum is not going to make your wishes come true, but it does make you appear obsessive and makes it all that much easier for people to dismiss your point of view.
Well there are 2 sides of thise debate on this forum and each side is as obsessive as the other.
Upvote
0