I’m waiting to see the data rate of Nikon’s motion-jpeg. In theory motion-jpeg is a superior capture codec. The color space sampling is 4:2:2 and it’s a intraframe compression scheme. Any one know if Nikon increased the data rate on the D3s vs D300s?

Plus nikon has big photosites that are almost twice the size of the Mark 4. TIme will only tell but I bet nikon’s decision not to increase mega pixel count will equal a cleaner image.

Professional video cameras achieved that eons ago and now are focused on quadruple that resolution plus many use 3 chip sensors (RGB) instead of a DSLR’s one chip.
Of course, they cost a ‘fortune’.

Perhaps RED (the company) has a clue and most here need to go study.

LOL!

About 16 bit – well Mamiya just introduced a medium format digital camera with 16 bit RAW output file capabilities.
That is where I see the next competition as headed.
Most here fail to realize the significance of this and are merely quoting things they DO NOT understand.
Again let me try and explain for YOUR sake.
In tonal graduation -
8 bits = 2 to the 8th power
12 bits = 2 to the 12th power
14 bits = 2 to the 14th power
16 bits = 2 to the 16th power
(Nikon is already at a 16 bit processor with 12 or 14 bit RAW output.)

Processing power to do this already exists but incorporating it into a camera’s OUTPUT circuitry will take a little time for some manufacturers. I expect it maybe next year along with wider dynamic range, wider tonality range and less “megapixelHUTRZ” nonsense, just like how megahertz and gigahertz became irrelevant when 64 bit processors became the norm.
To increase the ability to deal with a HIGHER BIT RATE, you simply up the bit rate of the processing CHAIN, as you cannot get a 16 bit foot into an 8 bit sock – an analogy.
16 bit is ALREADY here, so just update the processors in the cameras’ computers (you either go to 32 bit or you use a 16 bit pipeline in the OUTPUT stage after you leave the sensor).

And YES, Canon dropped the ball on BOTH the 7D and the new EOS-1 Mark IV, as they remind me of what Intel did when AMD introduced the Athlon 64 and wiped them away with 64 bit computing, then.
BIT structure is the way forward, as you need the wider GAMUT in tonality. color space and such matters or you are pushing lots of flawed megapixels, JUST like what we are seeing from Canon.
Bit structure is like widening the highway and sending more SLOWER or even equal vehicles – laden with more load and when they reach the destination, then the TOTAL sum of what they brought is much higher. Canon is sending faster vehicles with more load on a two lane highway and when there is an accident, all comes to a standstill.
FAST race car going no where (or the megaHURTZ nonsense)!
The past two years should have taught Canon much, but apparently, they are stuck on their egotistical desires.

Anyone remember what Canon did when the F3HP came out and buried them with its’ 8 fps in the MD4?

Well they introduced a pellicle mirror camera that gave them the bragging rights and what happened to it. (no mirror movement, as the mirror was semi-transparent and thus did not flap away in the mirror box but was stationary)

SAME exact story today!

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D3S/D3SA7.HTM

and some new 70-200 VRII shots:

http://ganref.jp/magazines/index/1/0/340
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review/20091020_322884.html