Hey, I'm happy that you're delighted with your Nikon.

But, as a multi-decade veteran of the corporate world, it doesn't exactly work that way. On the one hand, individual business units rarely subsidize (cushion) other business units - just doesn't make sense. Think of it this way - if a corporation had a unit that was consistently not achieving the required corporate profit rate or, worse, losing money, why would HQ continue to pour money into it? You wouldn't if you were the CEO, you'd put your money into the units that were making more money (otherwise the board would find someone who would - the board, representing the shareholders - wants to maximize total corporate profits, or else the shareholders vote them out...).

On the other, many corporations have centralized R&D units, from which each business unit can draw technology. So, if Canon's and Olympus' R&D units focus on image quality (for copiers or medical imaging), or Sony's R&D focuses on electronics (for televisions, cameras, video games) while relying on lens specialists (say Zeiss) for optics technology, the individual business units can benefit from the centralized research, at a lower unit cost, because the cost of the research is spread over more products. BTW, Nikon makes more than cameras: lithography systems, microscopes, binoculars and metrology (measurement) products and undoubtedly leverages its central research across these products - it no more stands on camera technology alone than the others do.

Ultimately, the competition among these, and others, drives improvements across the industry. As soon as one company comes out with an advance that increases their sales (because consumers now want it), the others are going to replicate - or better - surpass it, so as not to lose - or better - to gain customers. Those companies that don't adapt fall by the wayside - not many Kodaks, Polaroids, Yashicas around these days, except in collectors' hands. What this means for the OP is that it's pretty hard to go wrong with any of the major brands at this price point.

Again, glad you like your Nikon, but keep in mind that the Nikon you have today owes as much to itself as it does to Canon, Olympus, Sony, and others...

In my opinion, I would not set a budget for a camera or lens. A camera is a tool that you will use for years and needs to meet your expectations. Find the camera and lens that feels good in your hands and produces the quality photos that you wish to see. If you are simply taking family photos or the occasional landscape or stills like flowers, a less expensive camera, or even your cell phone, should create the photos you want, but, if you are venturing into a serious journey into photography, and enjoy shooting action, or want to produce larger prints, then $1000.00 may not get you what you want, therefore, you invest your hard earned money into a camera body and lens that will not satisfy your tastes and will need to re-invest into a better camera. It would be better to have a little patience now and wait until you are able to invest in something that will not need to be replaced in the very near future.