For all those people who want a crop sensor for "reach" I'm not overly convinced by that argument. You pack all those photosites so close together and yes you get more perceived reach, but the noise increases too. If ISO is high enough, I believe it's better to crop in Photoshop a full frame image. Really it depends on the ISO - a crop sensor is better for reach at lower ISO, but IMHO a crop of a full frame image is better at higher ISO.
In any case - can't wait for Feb!!
Yes, but at least have the option to trade effective reach for noise. Comparing a 5D2 to a 7D:
For a distant bird you can either get more detail on the bird with the 7D or a trace less noise (yes, when you are entirely distance limited the 7D can give a trace BETTER noise performance, at any ISO yes even ISO3200, than the 5D2 because it is slightly more efficient per area of sensor and the higher photosite density washes away more de-mosaic errors if you compare the images from the two cameras at normalized scale). [For non-distance limited it's a different story since the 5D2 sensor is much larger and that more than makes up for the slight difference in efficiency per area, assuming you maintain same aperture setting and don't adjust for DOF.]
At higher ISO there may be enough noise that fine details get washed away though and effective reach advantages get washed away. Even by ISO800 the 7D vs 5D2 effective reach advantage is already less than at ISO100. You still don't do worse for noise/aliasing/etc. though, actually a trace better.
And if you are sloppy and/or can't use high enough shutter speeds, if the focusing is a bit off, etc. then effective reach advantages also go away (but you still never do worse).