Interesting.
I suspect that what we're seeing is a plateau effect - much in the same way as we did when film cameras did with the likes of the Nikon F5, EOS 1n, etc. It's a sort of "where do we go from here?", conundrum. Technology's life blood is innovation and, now that digital technology is getting to a level where incremental improvements become increasingly difficult, releasing a new model that's 95% the same as its predecessor (and £5,000+ body only) is it any real surprise when it doesn't fly off the shelves?
When the current resurgence of film usage started, I was worried that it was a bit of a "dead cat bounce" that would be superseded by the next iteration of digital wizardry. The main concern I have (if you can call it a concern) is the emergence of larger than full-frame sensors. I've seen the output from the latest Hasselblad and Fuji kit and, if you want absolute technical perfection, they have a lot to offer. However, it's at a high price (just now). I'd still have my Hasselblad 503cx but I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't consider a Phase One back (when they get a price I can afford) to complement the A12s I have.
Markets go through cycles and I don't think we can write off digital. What we need to do is keep using lots of film and ensure that the likes of Ilford, Fuji and Kodak (+ new / returning kids on the block) see that there's enough demand to keep manufacturing and supplying us. I'm not a big Adam Smith fan but his argument that:
"Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to, only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer."
resonates with me. They aren't charities and there's no sentiment in business these days.
