(1) Sony is the innovation driver for milc
(2) Sony offered new features, then optimized the automatic modes, prioritized over manual handling of the camera
(3) Sony offers short model updates
(4) Sony had virtually no customer base to switch from, but had the largest potential foreign customer base that could switch over
(5) People learned about cameras from clumsy entry-level dslr cameras before the pre-milc era respectively the era of peak camera sales. Even high-end dslr look like relics of old times and it's a long way until the traditional ones realize that
But I suppose Sony has lost in 1.5 years what they've built in 8 years. Now even for milc it doesn't matter what system to choose and many of the Sony people are not loyal, they again move where they want to be.
>>3703977>...>>3703988>>3703991>It's the lensesPretty sure lenses are secondary to the above. Most lenses are available in a similar fashion, more so second hand for other mounts, sometimes now beaten in price-performance-point by first party stuff in mint condition. For Sigma even many lenses are exactly the same for other mounts.
If compactness and lens stabilization for super-wide-angle lenses is considered important for a system decision, the lack of more exotic lenses could be put in as a similar counter argument. Adaptation is not an argument here either, as this can be an advantage, yet in this case in particular problems are more likely to arise, too.
