Originally Posted by wafflecakee
Rangefinder coupling seems to be the expensive part.
Remember decades long we had series of Canonets, Olympus 35's, Yashica Electro's etc., all gone for a fraction of Leicas, Nikon RFs..
Before the SLR was the "expensive" design.. evolving through decades and finding use from professional down to grandmother hands, the sales of reflex cameras (DSLRs in our day) has reached to some 12 millions. Compare this to the only real rangefinder(digital) of today: Leica.. selling about 16.000 rangefinders a year.
The result of this evolution: An APS-C size DSLR with 24MP sensor and together with a zoom is selling for $699 whereas any m43 body near to its specifications was selling around $850-900 (without lens..) What does this tell you?
It tells me one thing: For Nikon and Canon the only expansion possibility left is to initiate a production series in the "mirrorless" branch. It's there where the "new turnover", larger profit margin and future developments are; for the DSLR market is about to reach stagnation as far as the overall sales volumes are concerned wheraes the mirrorless will keep on surging..
Nikon's $1.600 full-frame is a sign for what could come in the very near future. The major issue with the mirrorless is the preparation of a new array of lenses for nobody should expect the major players to come up with the M-mount. Even they could adapt it for AF, they would never do it..