Now we see through a glass, darkly...
- Apr 5, 2016
If you don't see how wrong mathematically and logically your comment was, what can I say? A poll is meant to provide a representation of a global population based on a sample as we cannot interrogate the whole population (in our case the whole population = all people around the world in the market for a Canon camera in that segment). This representation is expressed as a % (35.4% for the "yes" in that case). The absolute number (28 for the "yes") has absolutely no meaning per se. Only the % has.
Assume that those who voted "no" would rather buy a R5/R6 instead of a 5D Mark V. Applying your logic, it is as saying that Canon will only sell 51 R5/R6. Really?
Another example: election polls. Say 1000 people are interrogated (sample). Among them, 700 are willing to give their vote for X instead of Y. As an analogy, what you are saying is "oh but there's only 300 people in the whole country who are going to move their arse on Election Day to cast their vote for Y". It seems you cannot differentiate the sample size from the total amount of voters.
The most realistic option is one that your "scientific" poll totally ignored: It would all depend upon a comparison of the cost of each potential camera to purchase vs. the capabilities of each potential camera to be purchased.
Personally, I could see myself either buying a 5D Mark V or buying an R5 instead based on the comparative prices and performance of the two. The final decision for me wouldn't be until both products have been on the market and used by others for a while. It would also be based upon the fact that I already own most of the lenses I'll ever need in the EF mount. There's not a lot about the current RF lens lineup that motivates me to spend what I'd need to spend to totally switch over to RF at this stage in my life, especially with the current state of the photography industry (as in how much one can expect to be paid for photographic work).