I think a lot sports photographers are taking pictures and focusing on the sport. Big agencies have runners who grab the cards, while the photographer flips to the other card and continues. Transferring GB of data over wifi? I doubt this would be quicker for the qty that a Pro photographer shoots....
That may be true for the few at the upper end of the profession but the pros I've met are paid garbage and often do it as a second job or as part of other journalistic duties. They certainly don't have assistants at beck and call. Transferring an entire card's worth of data? Probably not a good idea, no, but that one rad shot/series of that amazing play? Sure, preview shot->upload to editing desk->publish->done. That would be amazing and in this day and age its gonna start being a lot more common.
My question, that I've asked others and still haven't got an answer to, is why should wifi be specifically excluded? It would cost nothing to the end user and it would have use to some percentage of photographers. In fact, a well implemented, fully integrated wifi would be a godsend for many. The opposition just sounds, to me, like curmudgeonly old men complaining about kids these days with their idroids and googlefaces.
It's going to be a mini 1DX with extra reach, but not as good high iso quality and not the same frame rate, otherwise it eats too much into the high end range. That for me is sound economics, not so much marketing.
e: I keep seeing people say that they understand Canon purposely limiting the burst rate because of marketing. So, another question: who here that owns a 1DX would sell it off for a 7DII, spec'd as listed, if it shot 12fps and pocket the extra cash? Who here would purchase a 7DII, spec'd as listed, that shot 12fps over a 1DX if money were not the limiting factor? I sure as heck wouldn't!
How many Pro's want a 2nd body when they do events? Heck, I'm not a pro, but I take 2 bodies everywhere I go. Now, if you can get a cheap variant which will do 90% of your Pro body, would you? What about if it only did 50%?
If you were looking into becoming a Pro, which would you buy? The MK II or the 1DX? And surely value for money is an important factor for most Pro's - whatever the invest they need to recoup, so money is rarely no object.
If you could afford a 60K Porsche, and then they bought out a better spec'd model for 30K, just how ecstatic would you be?
Sometime cannibalization of your high end kit works. Again, I'd like to think that Canon know their audience (1DX owners) better than we do, and therefore what their reaction would be like.
Back to the wifi - I've not seen the implementation in the 6D or other Canons personally but I thought the implementation was not so clever (in terms of the SW). Canon, Nikon and others are indeed poor when it comes to an integrated system and understanding the benefits of good workflow and expandability. Another reason why smartphones are so popular. And I don't think they should go away and do their own thing, i think integration into smartphones is easiest - be part of that ecosystem, allow simple transfer so the phone can edit and publish. I think trying to get your dSLR to log in with credentials to your blog or website, name it something, allow you to put some caption and then make it ready for publication is just too much right now. In fact I think that boat has gone. No, integrate with your phone, hence why maybe BT would be better in that respect.
Would I like wifi in every Canon body & GPS? Yes please. Until then I use a camranger and either Iphone gps logging or an external GPS. I previously used eye-fi for the same purpose.
@Jrista - you shoot with a 7D. You've shown that you can take good pictures with it. I get your frustration with Canon's release schedule. Who knows the exact reason. But as a complete solution, if you can get better elsewhere then you would have moved. Is a 70D sensor really that bad? Based on it's target market, I think the MK II will do well. Even with a tweaked 70D sensor.