I don't know the size of the smiles of Sony's shareholders, and I don't care. As long as the camera supplier of my choice makes enough profit to develop new ideas and to survive comfortably, my smile is wide enough for me. As for how well Sony is doing selling sensors, that doesn't have anything to do with how good or popular their cameras are. Their market share is relatively constant. Do you want me to repeat that again?
When it comes to Sony and innovation, I would like to see exactly what they have innovated when it comes to cameras apart from installing a relatively large sensor in a small, mirrorless camera.
- They did not invent IBIS, but got it when they bought Konica Minolta's camera division. Konica Minolta introduced IBIS with the 7D in 2004. Olympus, who introduced IBIS with the E-510 in 2007, developed the 5-axis IBIS which is the current standard. Olympus was also the first manufacturer to launch IBIS in a mirrorless camera, the E-M5 in February 2012.
- They did not invent mirrorless. That was Panasonic with the G1 in January 2009. The Sony NEX 3 and 5 were launched in May 2010.
- They where not the first to launch an advanced still/video mirrorless camera. That was also Panasonic with the GH1, launched in July 2010.
- They were not the first to launch a mirrorless camera that could shoot 4K internally. Also that was Panasonic with the GH4, launched in February 2014. The A7s that was launched 2 months later needed an external recorder almost as expensive as the camera to shoot 4K.
- They did not invent the hybrid viewfinder although that would have been a great feature in their DSLR/SLT cameras. Fuji did that.
- They did not invent uncompressed RAW according to what I've read on forums.
- Apparently, they didn't invent dual memory card slots either. Fuji managed to squeeze that in on the X-Pro2.
However, Sony is the first camera manufacturer to launch lenses for their mirrorless cameras that are as large and heavy as their DSLR counterparts (possible exception for the PanaLeica 42.5mm, but one can choose the excellent Zuiko 45mm instead), negating the weight advantage of the bodies if the pile of batteries needed for the Sony hasn't done that already. Not least are those lenses considerably larger and heavier than the counterparts for their own DSLR cameras. I believe you guys when you say that these lenses are made for cameras with resolutions much higher than what is available today, except for some medium format cameras. But who on earth are supposed to buy those cameras? Even most MF cameras hover around 50MP, and although Canon just broke the 50MP barrier for 35mm cameras, I see no reason whatsoever to upgrade from my current 36MP body unless the body in question has other features that are must-haves. The reality is that, if I buy one of the new 20MP offerings from Nikon, my D810 will probably spend most of the time in the dry cabinet.
There is of course the MF crowd and a bunch of landscape shooters around, but that is a niche market, and the competition is rather tough, not least considering the fact that MF cameras have larger sensors, which is still an advantage for much of the photography where very high resolution is needed.
If they wanted to make an impression, they should have gone for Leica's throat, designing some really excellent compact primes. How much does Leica charge for that 50mm Summicron APO? $6,000? There's money in tiny things too, and a great compact prime quartet would be very hard to resist for people like me. But the stuff they have launched now is just... yeah, fine... do these come with wheels?