Can Sony break into the DSLR market?

Any opinions?

At some point, do you think Sony will become a viable competitor to Canon and Nikon? Since those two are the big ones.

This is one of the stupidest posts in the history of YA.

Minolta were a pillar of the amateur market for decades - producing the world's first multimode SLR and the world's first AF SLR. They produced AI before Nikon and held a better market share than Canon.

When they hit a bit of a thin time, they were bought out by Sony.

Sony don't need to break into the DSLR market, they just need people to develop brains, because people see the TV adverts and never learn that Pentax were making SLRs while Canon and Nikon were copying German rangefinders, Olympus SLRs were the standard against which others were judged and the KMZ factory, just outside Moscow, has produced more SLRs and rangefinders than Canon and Nikon combined.

The bigger question: Can Sony even survive as a viable company in the future? They really don't have much going for them and they are hemorrhaging cash with no end in sight. They probably won't even be around by the end of the decade in there current form.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/305796-could-sony-be-on-the-road-to-bankruptcy

The only way Sony could become a viable competitor to Canon & Nikon, would be to improve their ability to back their camera products. My experience with a car radio (Sony has been a leader in electronics for decades), leads me to believe the right hand is not in synch with the left. That's why I'm "down" on Sony products.

Sony broke into the dSLR market in 2006 and every year have eaten away at Nikon and Canon's share. They don't need the pro market because pros don't pay the bills, the millions of bodies that are entry level do.

Every time Nikon, Pentax, Olympus sell a camera, Sony makes money since they all use Sony image sensors. Every time an iPhone 4, 4s and 5 sell, Sony gets paid, Sony image sensors there too. Sony is the only company that can make every part of a dSLR without outside help if they want to. Canon, Nikon, and Pentax can't.

Sony owns the mirrorless market, the NEX is crushing everybody. Nikon's 1 system is doing OK, the Canon M is a giant flop. Yes Sony is in bad shape as a company, but their camera division is doing great. The RX100 is selling like hot cakes, everyone wants the RX1 but not many can afford it. The A99 can do great things. While Sony is doing some great things, I don't feel a Sony Alpha is always the best choice. I think the A65 and A77 are too weak in the image sensor dept. For what they cost. The A37 and A57 are a solid value. They don't have a good performing crop sensor dSLR in the middle.

Pentax with a new Sony sensor is kicking with their new K5 II, that beats everything in the middle, like a Canon 7D or Nikon's D7000.

Canon and Nikon are not innovating. So they might be the big two now, but Sony was nothing in 2006, now look at them. If Sony is still around as a company in 5 years, they will be an even bigger force in the camera market. It's not a coke/pepsi world anymore. I remember 5-6 years ago when the CaNikon crowd said Sony was joke, not a real camera company etc. Then Nikon switched to using Sony made sensors for almost every camera.

Then those people took notice when the NEX started doing things, took notice when the A77 landed, and now drool over the RX1. Now lots of Nikon and Canon shooters use NEX cameras when they don't want to lug their dSLRs around.