And it is OBVIOUS that canon has been dragging their feet for years.
Given Canon's many innovations over recent years I would say the opposite is obvious.
I dont get the point of "but they still have profits" responses, because...that isn't even what we are discussing here.
What are we discussing then? The selective set of metrics where Sony is ahead? Because that's what it feels like any time someone cries about Sony innovation on this forum. Should I go to a Sony forum and insist that we only discuss weather sealing, DPAF, color science, and super fast lenses? In that case it's obvious that Sony has been dragging their feet for years.
The main points are that Canon's getting drop-kicked by Sony.
So in a basketball game the team that scores 18 points "drop kicks" the team that scores 40?
Every time canon brings out a camera, we sit back and see that's still the same (lame sensor tech) and whats missing (ALWAYS something critical).
What's the critical thing that's missing again? A fraction of a stop of DR at ISO 100?
Sony's AF is a game changer. AF is critical to cameras and is better than canon by far.
Sorry. I've shot with an A9. It was not a game changer. I can see how it would be very nice for a newbie. I cannot say that its keeper rate overall would be better than the keeper rate of someone who knows how to use a DSLR's AF system. I felt like it was less work, but I also felt less confident in it. Kind of like an auto versus manual transmission.
If my 5d3 ever goes belly up, it would be great to have a modern mirror-less that is not all kinds of 'meh'. Market share...who cares.
If the A9's AF was truly a game changer...like the difference between AF and no AF, or Canon USM lenses vs in body AF motors in the 90s...you would have already sold the 5D3 for an A9. Intelligent subject tracking is a 'nice to have' feature. The R has it, but it's not as fast as Sony's. By the time your 5D3 goes belly up it probably will be.