Every trend has a pattern of interval before reoccurring. Sometimes the pattern is market-driven but for most of the time is the choreographed result of the industry players. Examples are not rare of such marketing maneuvers spiraling upwards to become over-dosage until the potential customers are completely fed up. There are few admirable exceptions, the brain-children of Steve Jobs being some. But he knew innovations. He was not known for nothing about beating down his own innovations with newer ones. When it comes to the camera market, there is no Steve Jobs yet. The velocity of churning out new cameras turns so speedy that the novel models seem to aim at nothing but making a headline for their fifteen minutes of fame. Take for example the fad of retro-looking camera. The form factor is more for the mere sake of cosmetic.
I am really seeing not much, if any, and if I can put it this way, innovative bang for the buck on the camera market lately. The Sony A55's translucent technology is an exception. An old camera by today's standards, it has its flaw though. But it is at least on a par with most current sub-professional grade models in terms of functionality, and if with a Zeiss lens, as well as image quality. As for image quality, I can say for sure that 99.9999% of us think we can tell the differences apart in the images. In fact, for images done with cameras of the comparable grade, can we tell with even a 10R-size (10 x 12") print?
No, we can't. So we could be craving for the new camera more for the lure of their COSTLY cosmetic appeal, which is quite silly. Innovation-wise, these new cameras are so very wishy-washy. They have innovations yes but those are not really related to photography even if the maker claims embracing pure photography for the sake of marketing.
Opinionated views are mine.