Hi,
I would say your analysis is probably pretty good.
What I would add that it takes a lot of consistency to build a reputation. The NPS and CPS is important stuff.
The A7/A7r seems to be a pretty smart move, but not enough for me jumping on that train, but it is quite possible that I will do that with a later model.
Just to mention, I have an Alpha 99 which shares sensor with the A7. The A7r has an older sensor that lacks on sensor phase detection, so it relies on contrast detecting AF and it also lacks electronic first curtain. The lack of EFC means that the shutter needs to be closed pre exposure. I always use EFC on the Alpha 99.
The third aspect for me is that I always carry some long lens, so camera size is not really an issue for me, because the long lens decides the size.
Finally, I have a P45+ giving me a bit more pixels, so I am not starved for resolution. Besides that, 24MP is fine for what I am doing.
But give me 50MP, on sensor PDAF, subsampled video, raw histograms a larger battery, a few more good lenses and an OLP filter and I may be glad to climb on that train.
The lenses may come from Sigma, Zeiss, Zony or some firm in China as long as they are good optically and allow manual focus.
I would add that I am not a pro, just and engineer taking pictures. Some of those are shown here:
http://echophoto.smugmug.comAdded:
One thing to note is that Fuji made attractive cameras, sort of retro well made, some even having an optical view finder. But they did not venture into full frame. It can be that APS-C with enough MP, excellent lenses and Fuji's non Beyer CFA are good enough for demanding customers. So, they don't need full frame.
Best regards
Erik
Actually, they make movies and gear that's used to make movies. They have more street cred there than most of their competition in the still camera division (Except Fuji, because of their film and lens heritage). So it's not like they were making walkmans one day and went straight into camera gear the next.
Besides, most of the Minolta guys went to Sony after the acquisition. From what I know, their current R&D is bigger than what Minolta's has ever been.
I really get what Sony is doing. They can't compete with Canikon offering the same stuff, so they are looking for the next disruption. This means abandoning some projects after a while. They want to get marketshare and mindshare. Fuji isn't very keen on gaining marketshare and are happy doing evolutionary things. They appeal to different people.
Regarding the pro argument though, Not Sony, not Fuji, not anyone can touch CPS and NPS. This is a fact and thus makes all these brands non viable to the sports/ event shooter. But if you're a pro who's more into portraiture/ landscaping/ fine art etc. any of the brands will work just fine. I know and know of several who do great work with Sony and Fuji. e.g. David Hobby shoots Fuji, Frank Doorhof shoots Sony. Both do amazing work.
"Street cred" can only go so far. The rest is all about how the system appeals to your personal use.