I think people started talking about Fuji going the 4/3 route because there is a perception that Fuji can't compete with Nikon, but I don't think that's true. On pure image quality, the Fuji DSLRs are superb, and I still prefer the results from my S2 and S5 (in terms of colour, tone, and DR) to the D3, D700, D300, 5D, 5DII, and 7D. What I need from Fuji is greater resolution and a little more speed.
I see things exactly the same way as you, but the number of people who share our view is small, or at least Fuji thinks so. The majority thinks Megapixels and ISO noise and not much further. Maybe fps and AF speed. If you read in forums, you get the impression that noone take photos below ISO3200 anymore. It has become a complete obsession.
Same for speed. A camera that can only take 3fps is considered "too slow" for many things.
In such a market a Fuji Sx can only by a niche product. FUji can spend as much as they like on R&D of their sensors, if they are not able or willing to develop a modern camera body at a competitive price, they will only sell few of them.
Seen what Fuji is capable of in terms of IQ, it is frustrating to see them go for one compromise after the other. S5pro was already a compromise because sensorwise it was a technological standstill. It is a very good camera, but it has weaknesses.
Technically, they would have to scale up that sensor to FF and build in fast enough electronics that can do RAW compression for file size, implement multi channel readout for let's say constant 3fps in RAW at 14-16MP, and put all that in a d700 body. Technically absolutely feasable for 2500-3000, but they don't do it. To build another compromise camera with one or two really great features, one or two real showstoppers in order to maintain a sub 2k price would not do anymore, which is why they do not do it. The market is much more mature than 5y ago (S3 era).
But I guess this is their biggest weakness: They always decide for some strange compromised product, whereas lots of people want consequent and innovative products.
Something that just kicks a** - like the organic sensor at APS size, colours that will make people cry by their life-likeness and beauty, no Bayer mask, high resolution.
But something tells me that we will more likely see a low feature plastic body with slowish lens, a m4/3 sensor with 6 or 12MP (you have to decide what drawback matters less than the other) of which they will sell 1.389 copies.
Then they will close the photo department because "the market situation is no longer in line with their long time strategy" Yuck. Kodak SLR-n was the same. Very good image quality (at low ISO at least) that made a difference, but a flawed product from A to Z. Wrong company decisions, went out of business (in higher segments than compact boxes).
--
regards,
Bernie
