This all seems a bit amusing, and puzzling at the same time. For the past several years folks were still lusting after more mega pixels, but started to enjoy the merits of what the 5D had to offer with respect to image quality. Does not seem like much may have been lost in the update, but quite a bit was added to the older version, and at a much, much more attractive price.
I am not a fan boy or anything of the sort, but the specs on this updated version do not look all that bad. Let's be honest folks, even if they had gone to gapless pixels, more cross AF points, higher frame rates, and all those things folks are bemoaning, I do think that there would still be a rather large group of "glass half empty" folks complaining about what was missing. Could Canon have tweaked more things? Probably. But what they have is a fairly significant improvement in some areas, and probably enough to compete quite nicely with anything else out there now.
I also tend to think (maybe wishful) that it is not completely over yet. I would not be surprised to hear about yet another Canon DSLR before the end of the year. They will have to address the "pro level" offering, as the 5DMkII can now eclipse their flagship model for some things. Do not know anything, but would not be surprised to see the 50D sensor tech installed into a 1DsMkIV at 40MP or more, decent high ISO, rest of the stuff at least the same or better than now, and possibly at a lower price point also. The gap between the 5DMkII offering and the 1DsMkIII is closer on some things, but startling on the price point, so Canon may be pressuring themselves into something really beyond most folk's imagination, or offering an upgraded model 1-series at a much more reasonable price.
For a very large group of buyers, the new 5DMkII is going to be very attractive, hit enough marks, and bring folks back around to reconsidering Canon. If folks are complaining about marketing driving things over technology, they are missing the point of business, even for giants like Canon. Were Canon to put all of the best tech they have into a model to "blow the competition away", (as they did early on), what do they gain if they also have to charge $8000 or more for that model? This 5DMkII has enough of everything for the largest mid-upper end buyers, including some serious HD video.
I just do not quite get what all the "DPR-like" or "FM-like" bitching and moaning is about this camera. I blows the socks off of its predecessor. It is significantly cheaper. It meets or exceeds almost everything else on the market right now, and there is still the possibility for an even better "flagship" model. If the 5DMkII does not get you there, wait for the next 1-series and pay that price, or go to MF and pay an even bigger price.
LJ