Those following the Canon sensor technology, esp. the market disruption caused by the D800, will find this comment from the-digital-picture.com rather interesting:
Canon didn’t release any disruptive technology in this case.
..... (of the 5D3)
which raises the question: to stay competitive, does Canon need to turn heads and release disruptive sensor technology - something that drops jaws? the t4i sensor isn't disruptive and neither is the 5D3
Even the 1DX sensor does not strike me as disruptive, from the comments and reviews anyway. the camera appears to be a highly optimized implementation of incremental changes to a mature technology, very well executed, the best Canon has ever offered and capable of outstanding performance, to be sure, but not disruptive in the case of the sensor itself. is the 1DX sensor disruptive? 1DX owners please tell us.
the problem for Canon (well for anyone looking to Canon for "disruptive" sensor technology") is that having just asserted the flagship $6K body would they then, early in the 1DX life, introduce a FF body containing a disruptively better sensor with better DR and/or RAW noise performance ? Time will tell if Canon takes any cues from Nikon in that regard.
One approach would be to introduce a disruptive capability set in a crop sensor. Its hard for me to imagine an entry level FF or even a 5D4, eclipsing the 1DX in IQ -- even if it had inferior feature set. Perhaps, however Canon could introduce a disruptively better crop sensor. With the IQ potential masked by the high pixel density, I wonder if the next generation of higher-end crop bodies might begin to approach 5D2 IQ levels, perhaps.