I read an article recently also about CMOS versus CCD just to understand the differences (see link below).
Per this article the costs of CMOS can be higher than CCD.
http://www.teledynedalsa.com/corp/ma...d_vs_cmos.aspx
But if the megamanufacturers have already gone down that road then the choice was made some time ago and they are locked in.
I am sure the main cost is in the lithography equipment and surrounding machinery. They need to sell a gazillion to get their R and D costs back no doubt.
Hasselblad uses KAF40000 I believe or was it KAF39000? One of those and they stitch them together to get 80mp or so.
These KAF39000 on up have pathetic QE as well so perhaps CMOS versus CCD may be a less compelling argument in the larger beyond
39mp sizes. KAF39000C is 20% QE. I don't know what 5D Mark ii or Nikon D800 QE is but I would be surprised if it is any worse than that.
For a DSLR though perhaps CMOS makes more sense as all the circuitry is far more compact.
Greg.