As has been said in other similar threads, most people impulse purchasing a DSLR are likely to end up with something Nikon, or something Canon with little or no tech knowledge about the differences.
So what are the motivations? With electronics there's the massive stigma that if you buy something old, you're an idiot and that's usually true.
If they go into the shop and see a 2 year old 650D or a 3 month old Nikon somethingsomething for the same money, they are going to buy what's newest on the assumption that it's better. Canon pushes out something 'new' each year in the ***D line for this reason, it would seem.
To be honest I think it's reaching a bit of a plateau in terms of what hardware features you can add to an entry level camera.
When you buy an entry level DSLR like a 700D, it's still bazillions better in terms of usability for first time shooters than it was 10 years ago.
In terms of the software innovation, which is effectively maximising the usability and effectiveness of the hardware with software - Magic Lantern has shown what each camera is easily capable of, if they chose not to ignore development in this manner.
Why in god's name no Canon DSLR has a built in intervalometer at the very least, so many years after a digital cameras have become the norm truly boggles my mind.
It seems Canon wants to treat it's DSLRs as though they are still film cameras, a mechanical item with the minimum software and firmware required to make it functional.
In saying this though it's sooooooo hard to change anything in a giant corporation, it's like trying to do a 3 point turn with an oil tanker.
If there's a "Dont fix what aint broke" mentality there, it going to change any time soon.
