Another newbie comment, been reading EOSHD for a long time and have learned a lot - thank you. On my daily commute I walk between the Boston Childrens Museum and the Boston Tea Party Ship, which is a photogenic historic landmark and tourist stop. This space brings together the two biggest camera demographics - Parents and Tourists. I certainly see plenty of cellphones, but the dedicated camera is in no danger of extinction. I see lots of dedicated cameras, almost all of which are small. Very few p&s small, most are in the csc, bridge camera, superzoom, etc. size range. Some DSLRs, but few and far between. If mirrorless is failing in the US, you wouldn't know it from what I see on my commute. I believe the $300-$700 mirrorless segment is going to really kill the dslr. Anyone who struggles to pack all the gear (parents, travelers) prizes small. Equal image quality and features, the smaller camera will sell. At this point the smaller camera is also winning the quality/feature race. Parents always want video, and not needing a separate dedicated video camera saves a lot of money and space. Two lousy $350 cameras or an A6000? Pragmatic everyday space/cost/quality decisions by parents and travelers now tip so far in favor of small still+video cameras that the bigger more expensive to manufacture DSLR is doomed to eventual extinction in that segment. Particularly when all these average people ask their photo enthusiast friends who read sites like this for advice, and the only advantage anyone can claim for a $700 DSLR is the ovf. How many of your non-enthusiast friends have asked about their legacy glass? Any brand loyalty there among the kit-zoom crowd? Or do most people just want a new camera? In this light the CaNikon attempts (M/1) at mirrorless make sense, they are aiming at the right target. The problem I see is CaNikon seem to want to position mirrorless for consumer against their dated $500-$700 DSLRs. The competition is pushing innovative capabilities into that price range much faster, esp. video, evf, sensors, stuff that compares well against CaNikon (also dated) Pro equipment. What average parent/traveler buys a big $1000+ DSLR over a Nex6 or A6000 (to pick a popular option) for kids or travel when small counts, video saves you a whole 2nd camera, and you sacrifice nothing in image quality or low light? Back in the stone age of the Nex6, autofocus might get a parent to go DSLR, but A6000 removes that barrier. What is left aside the mighty ovf? Really there is no reason not to choose small, and small sells to anyone who has to pack and carry gear. I am confident the US consumet market will shift, probably soon. I see the signs every day on my commute. The future is small, versitile and beautiful.