Most users are heavily invested into the SYSTEM (lenses+flash+accessories+user familiarity) that they have chosen. It does not make sense to change willy-nilly.
Because after a while manufacturing technology and production cost modelling will be achieved by leading rivals.
The impact of a high MP sensor by Nikon, is not on Canon. As time passes, both companies may go on to even higher MP sensors (say, 50MP?)and be able to sell the digicam at a price point that makes sense to the ordinary consumer.
The true victims suffering from this new phenomenon are (1) medium format digital cameras; (2) bridge cameras of various brands; and (3) very high priced digiSLRs (Leica S2 body only at £16,000).
Nikon's
USA website says this:
"Hold in your hands an HD-SLR able to capture images rivaled only by those produced with a medium-format camera"
Another
website directly compares it with medium format:
"Nikon D800 Has Best Sensor Ever Made, Beating Even Hasselblad"
Digital MF is not cheap.
The issue is
money. If we all had unlimited money, then no issue. Buy everything.
With limited money, we look for value for money. Or MP per $.
If a 35mm system which you already possess, can give you MF performance, then why waste $$$$$ again to buy into a digital MF system?
Say, D800 body costs about Sing $4,500~$5,000. You already own many Nikon lenses, thus no need to buy lenses again.
If Canon comes up with something matching and around same price point. You own many Canon lenses, thus no need to buy lenses again.
Compare this to splurging out about $20,000 for a digital MF body+std lens. Buy expensive additional MF digital lenses all over again -and they not even made by Carl Zeiss.
It is a struggle now, for digital MF manufacturers. Some backs cost as much as US$40,000. If you have unlimited money, it is no issue. Most consumers cannot afford this kind of spending for their hobby.
