I'm not anti-video and I grasp how important it is to provide good, or great, video performance on the new 7D II. That being said though, I too worry that the camera will be compromised too much towards video. Or, more accurately, that the still capability will be compromised in order to achieve the video goals. It's a worry every time they post another video oriented "gee whiz, lookatthat!" rumour.
However, I do think that the 7D II is still going to be a stellar stills camera. I think the long-rumoured 24 MP wildlife/action/sports powerhouse for which many of us have waited is still coming, with a stellar AF and amazing 10-12 fps tied to a deep buffer.
Although I haven't longed for a hybrid viewfinder, I can see its benefits as a stills shooter as well. Particularly if they offer a "Heads Up Display" sort of arrangement, much as Fuji has done in some of the X series. For example, a transparent, live Historgram overlaid over a corner of the optical view might be useful in challenging lighting conditions. Only time will tell if this is the sort of thing they plan to implement into this new hybrid viewfinder.
As for Canon's lack of innovation in sensors, well that may be coming to an end. Certainly DPAF has shown that they can be inventive and innovative. Insofar as the technology is more useful for video, some might think that it's a sign that Canon is favouring video over stills, but I don't think that's the case. We've already been told that using Dual Pixel technology for AF is just the beginning of what it can do, so it could be an interesting 3 or 4 years for Canon if that promise can deliver new tricks for stills.
I also think it is wise to keep in mind how amazing the original 7D was when it first came out. Given how the 5D series has moved from strength to strength, I don't think Canon will compromise on the quality of the 7D II, simply because they will lose a golden opportunity to build on an already incredibly popular product line. If they "blow it" with this product, it will hit them hard where no corporation wants to get hit--their reputation. Although the bread and butter Rebels may be what pays the bills and keeps the lights on, it's the high-profile "flagship" products that allow them to sell those rebels. Delores from Idaho may not know which end of a 1DX is which, but she knows there are lots of Canon cameras at the Olympics and as well as in the hands of pro photographers, and that is what makes her decision to buy a T3i, or SL1 (or a little Canon pocket camera, for that matter). Companies can afford to "blow it" with a low end camera, then replace it with a nearly identical model some months later. Witness the "oops--T4i had a problem with the grips turning white. Better add a fully rotating dial and call it a T5i six months later!" situation. But the same isn't true for a high-end camera. A bad rap in a premium camera is harder to shake.
Another point to consider is the time factor. Given how long people have been waiting for it, Canon doesn't want the 7D II to underwhelm. It may actually be a positive that it's been so long, insofar as it might mean Canon is waiting till the product is "right" before they release it. Consider the 200-400 F4 IS with 1.4TC--the wait was so long it became a running gag that it was more akin to Bigfoot than a real lens
. Yet it delivered all that was promised of it when it finally shipped. I know, for most of us that's a moot point--we can't afford it. But we all still wanted it to be phenomenal anyway--and it is! I think it will be like that for the 7D II--except this camera WILL be affordable (if still expensive compared to the other APS-C cameras).
I've said it before but I'll say it again, I think Canon will make the 7D II (and I hope they choose that name for continuity) will be great, because they don't dare make it anything less than phenomenal. I could be wrong--in which case it will likely flop and flop badly. But I still hold out hope that it will be everything the 7D was in its time---and more!