Yes, but see what happened when the A7 II was launched. Suddenly there were lots of used A7s II on the market. Many people run around in zig zag to catch the latest technology.
Cameras don't need to be "current". I used the OM-1 for 30 years and it was only "current" for the first 3-4 of them. The Nikon F3 was manufactured for 21 years, and some of the manual focus lenses that were made for it are still in production almost 40 years later. They are in no way "current", but are still being used to take great photos with, as is the F3.
I have started wondering if the camera industry, except for a few niche suppliers like Leica and Hasselblad (and Canikon if they can manage to cater for their niche, which is DSLR), can survive at all. Although many good cameras are being made, they are to a large degree competing with the mobile phone industry, seeing who can produce the most electronic junk. That's a competition the Chinese mobile phone manufacturers will win easilly.
Sorry for being sarcastic, but I think camera manufacturers are committing collective suicide by competing with their own last year's models, more or less claiming that it's already obsolete, bordering to junk, and while mobile phones are getting competitive with image quality and run rings around "real" cameras for functionality. Not the kind of functionality that you and I want, but the functionality more than 90% of users want.
I had an interesting conversation with an "enthusiast light" the other day. He had come to the point where the quality of the photos from his $300 Chinese mobile phone had surpassed that of his "real" camera. He's still interested in buying a new one, but mostly because it looks cool and a bit more serious. I don't think he's alone, and Sony, Fuji, Olympus etc. should be very worried about this kind of market development.