After looking at the photos and trying to determine the amount of vertical squishing of the LCD display caused by the perspective I really don't think the LCD is any where close to 16:9 instead it's closer to 1.4:1 or maybe even 4:3.
If you calculate the number of pixels the known round exposure compensation dial is verticially compared to horizontal you see the camera is squished about 32% vertically. Also if you compare the camera in picture's dimensions to a 5DmII's actual dimensions (and assume they are the same) you determine about the same squish.
Measuring the LCD screen in the picture reveals its approximately 137 pixels wide and 63 pixels horizontal. Taking into account the squish it becomes 137 pixels x 97 pixels or about 1.4:1.
These are all approximations but it's no where close to 16:9.
I might be wrong, but from the looks of the raw file, there doesn't seem to be a battery compartment door on the battery grip. Maybe the batteries load in from the side like the 1D?
I think this is because it looks more ergonomic like the regular horizontal grip so they couldn't put in the normal rectangular grip door.
After looking at the photos and trying to determine the amount of vertical squishing of the LCD display caused by the perspective I really don't think the LCD is any where close to 16:9 instead it's closer to 1.4:1 or maybe even 4:3.
If you calculate the number of pixels the known round exposure compensation dial is verticially compared to horizontal you see the camera is squished about 32% vertically. Also if you compare the camera in picture's dimensions to a 5DmII's actual dimensions (and assume they are the same) you determine about the same squish.
Measuring the LCD screen in the picture reveals its approximately 137 pixels wide and 63 pixels horizontal. Taking into account the squish it becomes 137 pixels x 97 pixels or about 1.4:1.
These are all approximations but it's no where close to 16:9.