2013 is being optimistic. If there is one, it will be the 1DsMKIV and it will upwards of 7 thousand bucks if the prior one was any indication. As far as full frame goes, I think canon is done with the 5DmkIII and any increases in MP will have to wait 4 years for the MK4.
Take a 1Dx spec camera and up the MP to say min 36 but probably 40 I wonder what that would give the top fps to be? and who knows maybe they've throttled the digic processors back a little knowing the road map. That would give them the reason for the high price as Nikon et al would not have a direct equivalent. If there's going to be one it won't be a 5D derivative would be my guess
honestly who gives a crap what the fps are. if you're shooting in studio or landscape scenarios (the audience for a big mp body), 4-5 fps is more than enough.
so something has to go in there around $4500-$5000
nikon offers a 36 MP camera for under 3000$ and canon for 5000$.... well... i don´t know about you but that idea sucks.
+1 . the OP's gap is pointless to fill. If canon has a gap to fill is the 2-3K gap
I disagree with CR's take that people will pay more. Many are locked in to the lens system for now. Rip them off constantly with more overpriced glass and bodies and things may turn from a small trickle of migrants to an exodus away from the brand.
If it is in the 40-50+MP range and a medium format sensor...then it might be worth upgrading...
I better start saving now though.
it would require brand new lenses and very expensive to say the least. canon will never get into the medium format arena.
I would be okay with a high MP version of the 5D3, with a hit in the FPS...BUT I don't want to loose stops in native ISO. If we loose one and the max native ISO is 12,800 I'd be content. Can Canon pull this off? As it is I think the 5D3 will be my next DSLR..AFTER Canon comes up with a fix for the light/exposure change problem and eliminates it from future production cameras.
that's just silly. the audience for such camera is not those that care about crappy high ISO images done under crappy light with crappy dynamic range that is associated with high ISO values. the audience for this camera are light lovers. people that shoot in studio or landscape with buckets of beautiful light and not the inside of their closets with the lights off. I'd much rather see LOWER ISO capabilites. how about ISO25 for a change and 14+ stops of DR. The D800 already proved that downsampling big MP to 22MP more than matches what the 5DmkIII can do in low light, so who cares for more? If so, don't buy it. Stupid high ISO can be hand with the 1DX if that's your boat. I see no reason that every camera has to chase the ISO values as if that was the only priority.http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d800-review#iso_performance
(click next at the bottom to see the D800 match the 5DmkIII at high ISO)
The religion of low light is honestly getting old. We need to move past that. this is after all PHOTOGRAPHY, not DARKography.