johnstra wrote:I don't think that things were that different in the days of film. What is now seen as a mature technology was certainly not in the 70s and 80s. No one I know has ever hung on to a camera for 20 years, unless it was in a cupboard collecting dust. The average cycle time was probably around five years. If it went to twenty years I don't think that any company could afford to make them. Having said that no one is forcing us to replace what we have. I have an A77 but if I still had to use my A700 I would not be that upset.
My XGM/X700/X570/X370/SRT201...etc. etc.. were semi-retired in 2008 when I went digital. They all still work today, and I've taken tens of thousands of pictures with them over the years, starting in 1981. And although in a cupboard collecting dust, my Dad's Argus C3 still takes fine pictures, considering the limits of the lens. So, to say that 5 years is the average, well, then I guess I'm way above average!
I've had 8 SR/MD mount bodies that I can recall, and I still have 7, having given one of my XGMs to a friend from Brazil. And I still have my MF and LF cameras, too. I've had multiple flashes, more lenses than I can remember, winders, and what-nots that attach to cameras, and my cameras were, at one time my burial guarantee. (i.e., I told my sister to sell my camera gear to pay for my burial, being single then).
So, for someone like me, who is willing to invest heavily in a system, the camera companies can continue to make money off of me by offering me small improvements (in bodies and lenses) and more things that I need to make my photography better and more enjoyable. The tech of 1981 and the XGM, with TTL flash metering, was all I ever needed.
Frankly, I would have jumped at an a580
IF it would have had GPS, since I've had so many of my pictures taken in various parts of the world that I can't even remember them all, but Sony choose not to put it in to have an extra goodie to entice people over to the EVF of the a55. Camera companies used to be more like car companies - they'll sell to new users, to those who wear out their old models or just want an upgrade, but they know that many are like Ford truck buys, buy what I need, and use it till it can't be fixed no more.
Now they get a new lease on life, as they're selling a technology that's rapidly changing - digital sensors - and get to make lots more money by improving that enough to make us want the updates. Previously they only updated things like faster shutter speeds, better metering, or more durable bodies, but such incremental updates weren't too big of a draw, and incremental updates still are not - DK is sticking with the a900 over the a99, as there is not enough advantage in the sensor to offset the lack of OVF and the problems that creates in the studio.
Soon, camera tech will plateau again, and they'll be back to making replacements and things for people starting in photography. There will always be 'gimmicks' added, like portrait mode or night scene mode, but those are just camera setting we're already used to doing, and most advanced photographers will hardly buy a new body because of it. The long and short of it is,
I buy camera systems, not electronic devices, and that's what I want a camera company to produce.
Dusty