I think one can now reasonably expect an announcement of the H5D-40C, as higher-ISO replacement for the H5D-40, as the H5D40 has been the microlensed Hi-ISO camera in the Hassy range.
The H5D-40C might be even faster by being microlensed, even if the H5D-50C is not.
My (unconfirmed) info is that the new H5D-50C sensor is 36.7 x 49.1mm.
I expect a trickle of sensor announcements between now and Photokina, as Sony, Truesense, and Sony jockey for position. There will probably also be good deals on the current models as Hassy, Phase, Leica/Sinar and Pentax raise cash to commission production runs of their chosen sensors.
It will be interesting to see whether the CCD sensors are deprecated in new model ranges, or will coexist - at some point the MF guys should run out of the energy needed to tune every possible sensor/camera/lens combo, and should concentrate on just a few models.
Edmund
1.Wouldn't a 44x33 Cmos sensor cost the same despite its Mp count as long as the size is the same?
2.Do you think that it is reasonable for Sony to design a sensor that wouldn't be an "expanded image area" version of an existing one? (especially if one considers the possible production volume)
3.36,7x49.1 doesn't much with any current Sony sensor for pixel density, it's close to the 24mp one, but doesn't much, it does much
exactly to the 36mp sensor if expanded to 33x44…
I am not saying that this is what is the case, I'm only considering what makes sense and how
existing technology can be applied to an MF product. What I find more possible, (it does fit well with current situation) is that a current high production FF sensor has been chosen (the 36mp one which is used in D800E and A-7R) which has been designed having the absence of AA filter in mind, that this sensor will make a good base for an entry level MF camera of 33x44 image area and that would provide a considerable price drop of the product with respect to H5D-40 and then, the same sensor can be expanded further in size to even larger image areas in size, (36x48 or even MF-ff) for higher Cmos versions. I don't think that MP count has anything to do with market positioning anymore (image area does).
Another thing to consider, is that the angle that photon rays "hit" the sensor is very similar for FF DSLRs and MF (due to the larger distance from mount on MF cameras) which permits common pixel density designs to be used on both formats by only altering the size of the image area. Further more, MF makers do
need some extra sales to secure survival and price is an important factor in achieving that. Another thing to consider, is that the use of Cmos sensors that behave as they are expected in a "common" DSLR, will reduce the "fear of use" for some customers and can be used to "bridge" the gap that DSLRs now have with respect to MF… In other words, I expect CCD MF to continue its "ultimate quality" status, Cmos MF to play the part of the "larger DSLR" which is more friendly to some people than current MF and FF DSLRs to play the part of "entry level to serious photography".