.....will that change people's anti-Canon sentiment? When I'm out shooting with my 5DIII, I marvel at its vastly improved AF, burst rate, handling, user interface, LCD screen, responsiveness, and low light performance far more often than I lament about its DR, which is more than sufficient for 98% of my shots. That said, some people can't get over its DR handicap compared to the D800. The DR disadvantage is real, so there's no sense in arguing about anymore.
Since DR and sensor ratings seem to be the most important factors for the internet crowd, what if the 1Dx shows a marked improvement in DR over the 1DIV and 1DsIII? Will people still be going poo-poo on Canon and telling them to "try harder?" I wouldn't expect Sony Exmor performance, but what if the 1Dx can match the D4 in DR?
With the 5DIII, Canon addressed the 5DII's most glaring weakness (AF, FPS, build qaulity), whereas with the 5DII, Canon didn't hold back on the sensor tech but crippled everything else (AF, FPS, build quality) to distinguish it from the 1DsIII. Is it possible that Canon's strategy this time around is to reserve its best sensor technology for its flagship body as a means of distinguishing it from the 5DIII?
Only time will tell. Personally, I really don't care because I was never in the market for a 1Dx, and I don't see the point in rejoicing or lamenting over the performance of a product I never considered purchasing. I merely pose this question out of curiosity, since many people seem intent of formulating their opinion of an entire company's reputation based on one metric of sensor performance, DR.