I think the most likely new features to come in Canon full frames are in this order:
.......snip.........
Since this has been taken slightly off topic by a medium format reseller, I think it's okay to continue.
You know, I don't know any professional whose total income is derived from photography that ever starts a project with the thought of using only what is "good enough".
I do know that once creative briefs are set, then changed, then changed again and you've been given the green light to go ahead the first thing you think about when it comes to equipment is what will allow me/our studio to produce more in style and content than is expected.
The second thing you think of is what happens if all of it stops working, or the client changes the brief in the middle of the project? That's where options, backups and trucks that have more than 4 wheels come in.
But when it comes to selecting your A camera, sometimes that can be a more detailed file, but usually to achieve the "more than expected goal" is to make sure you have the equipment that allows you the time and speed to really capture that one interesting moment in still and video.
We're finishing the editorial of several videos from a recent project. 90% is shot with the RED, 10% with the 5d2, 100% of the stills with a 1ds 3.
As much as the RED file is technically superior, the camera is large, takes more setup time and can only fit into certain spaces. Then it's a 5d2 and not because it's good enough, because it's one of the few cameras that will fit in the designated space and allow us to capture what is on the creative brief.
It's funny, I don't see where clients notice the still camera you use, but they do notice the RED (probably because it's become a catch phrase and because it's so large). Then again after the shoot and all the galleries have been posted, both still and motion, the only thing the agency and clients notice is did you get that elusive image they have on the ever expanding creative brief.
They don't know, or really care if the image is raw or h264.
They don't care if the tonal value is 10% different or the color is 18% different because most know that once we get to a locked cut, everything will be sent to some form of third party software to color and match each image to style and normalize the look of the video. 10, 12, 14 or 16 bits is just a term that makes a client's or AD's eyes glass over because they don't consider that part of the technique their problem. It's my problem, or the retouchers problem or the post house's problem and we/they will deliver.
The reason I bring this up, is because the same can be said with stills. Every client wants to see as close to the exact look on set, or at least a pleasing look, but every client knows there will be rounds and rounds of post processing, retouching and final coloring before the images get into play.
So for the next generation of cameras, still or motion, expensive or reasonable, ultra mega pixels or moderate, the real motivational factor to move people to buy will be functions that allow the artist and business person the ability to tell an interesting story,keep the imagery in focus and most importantly allow whoever you work for to impress the people that hire them.
To me the real motivating factor of my next camera purchase will be moveable iso and I'm hoping somewhere down the line, a type of face/subject recognition auto focus that is touch screen. Touch on one subject and the camera tracks focus all the way through the take (if so desired).
To me innovation like that will be a game changer, but given all of that, the real need in still to motion convergence is software that can easily and affordably do to motion images what i can do with stills.
Something like lightroom for video correction, but anything that allows you to work faster, cleaner and more creatively without the down time of learning whole new processes that come very close to doing the same thing.
Most people don't know this but cs5/6 extended allows you to correct and effect video. It's a little different than working on stills, but not the same leap as learning color, scratch, or Divinici or the 5 other suites that work with video/film/motion imagery.
As cameras converge, so should software. At least I hope so.
But. . . to answer the original poster on the question of an Aptus vs. a 5d2 anyone would have to see his present work, know his client base or reasoning and the most important what level he wants to take his photography.
IMO
BC
