Quote:
|
Given that owners aren't taking full advantage of their DLSRs, the reason for buying these cameras comes back to great image quality, primarily attributable to large sensors. So if camera manufacturers could produce a smaller, easier-to-use camera that was capable of DSLR-like quality, wouldn't the quality-sensitive market flock to it? Undoubtedly.
|
Screw that, that is NOT a given. That's why this website, and many others exist. The market hasn't changed. Professionals will always want tools that enable them to work in the easiest way possible, within reasonable artistic quality limits. Enthusiasts will always want the most toys to play with. The bulk of the market is going to get whatever is sufficient for their needs and wants.
The Professional market will always be profitable to companies meeting their needs.
The Enthusiast market will always be profitable to companies meeting their needs.
The Mass Consumer market will always be profitable to companies meeting their needs.
What is NOT and never HAS BEEN profitable is companies confusing those markets with each other. Pentax made that crucial confusion, much to Canon and Nikon's profit. Now, they've corrected some of their mistakes and have turned a profit in a year when no other camera division is expected to, by downsizing their infrastructure and focusing narrowly on a single market: The High End Enthusiast market.
Your camera will always be worth to you what you get out of it. The fact that you're here means you're likely to get a lot more out if than the average mass market consumer, and you're well on your way to enthusiast.
*Edit* And while I'm ranting, I'll just say for the record you absolutely CAN NOT get the same quality out of a fixed lens camera as you can with a DSLR and a set of lenses. Different lenses do different things and there's no one size fits all solution.