The obvious additions..
 

This camera looks fantastic, it would be amazing, if:

1/2" sensors (like everyone has said)
4:2:2 50Mb/100Mb codec (see Nanoflash using compact flash for possibility)

I wonder why JVC has to always take one step short of making an amazing camera? Why would anyone buy this camera instead of an EX1 if the EX1 offers 1/2" and JVC 1/3"--no matter what the other benefits are?

700 vs. EX1/EX3
 

What we've found in doing research is that out of the HDSDI in the right conditions the 700 and the EX3 can look identical, but take the situation to low light or try to achieve a shallow depth of field in an interview and the EX3 suffers.

Moreover, try the same test to recorded media and the 4:2:0 EX3 doesn't begin to compare with the 4:2:2 PDW700, so worry not, the 700 is more more similar to the F900R than it is to the EX3.

AGAIN: shoulder mount, CCDs and non-proprietary batteries.

I think what we have found with the EX cams is that 1/2" CMOS compares to 2/3" CCD very well.. But comparing CCD to CCD or CMOS to CMOS size still matters.

We will have to wait and see with the new cam..

IBC isn't too far off, lets see what Sony have to offer, I don't imagine the EX range is going to stand still for long!

JVC Cams are a nice addition to the market though and offer a great upgrade path for those with investments in 1/3rd lenses

I suspect that's a typo for NAB, but I know what you mean! If anybody with influence at Sony happen to be reading this, my vote would be for something physically very like the HPX300, but with the 1/2" chips and lens of the EX series, SxS media instead of P2, and with the 50Mbs XDCAM-HD422 mode.

Oh, and could you formalise the SDHC recording via adaptors, and make sure we can record 50Mbs to it? Thanks! :-)