I agree with your point that people looking to buy camera bodies should also consider glass. I say it in my other posts when people look at going into a DSLR, and I will going forward. With that said, please tell me where (in our debate) I said that everyone considering these two cameras only has $5000 to spend ?
Lets say the person had $8000 to spend.
With them not spending $2000 more on a body that they may not need (or want), the photographer still got a great camera and had $2000 extra to spend on lenses, flashes, battery grip, tripods, or whatever.
That to me sounds like someone that actually
does understand their budget.
And while you are slamming Canon (which I notice you do quite often) take a look at the reviews on the 5d. It has proven image quality, durability, and solid features. You keep going back to the burst mode, well honestly, not everyone (even professionals) will need fast burst for their style shooting.
The problem with hypothetical statements like the photog we are both talking about is that anything goes. You're right, we never said how much money the guy has, and if he did have $8000 then nothing we are talking about matters. What if he/she wants to go Sony, or Pentax? What if they had $20,000 to spend and decided to raise another $10,000 and go Hasselblad?
The main issue I did have way back when was when someone mentioned something about getting a D3 over a 5D, then someone else mentioned the price, and I said that the price difference would be negligible given the cost of both cameras. Anyone in the market for a system built around a 5D or D3 wouldn't care too much (note: too much) about the $2000. They would pick either the Canon for the price, or the Nikon for the performance, since that seems to be the main difference between the two (sans any specifics).
I am not out to bash Canon, just as some aren't out to bash Nikon when they speak of bad high ISO noise. The 5D is a wonderful camera and when it was introduced I sang its praises as being the perfect alternative to the 1Ds, or a backup for 1Ds shooters. It is still the least expensive full frame camera on the market.
--BUT--
For those photogs that have a thing about speed and price-per-performance ratios (i.e. what am I getting for the price) the 5D is a bit over priced still. I know it's full frame, but 3 fps is just slow and for the price you pay, some find it just not worth it. As economists say "All things equal" the 5D doesn't offer much over the 30D or 40D except for the sensor and larger body to hold the sensor and prism.
Now, when some look at the D3, and see what they are getting for the $5000 price tag, they see two things... (1) A full frame camera that can do 9 fps and has this and that feature set, and (2) That camera costs only $500 more than the Canon equivalent.
That is where the wow comes in. Even if we all agreed that the feature set of the 1DIII and the D3 were the same, the deciding factor would be the FX sensor vs. the 1.3x crop; the 9 fps vs. the 10fps; max ISO of 25,600 vs. ~ 6400 and the 12.4 MP vs the 10 MP.
Now, for us fence sitters (I am a Nikon shooter still waiting for the D3 to prove itself, if it fails in IQ then I will have to go Canon) the only thing holding us back is the D3 IQ at ISO 1600 and above. As many on the web say: "If Nikon made ISO 12,800 on the D3 look like ISO 800 on the D2xs I am satisfied," and I agree. That sensitivity is unheard of in DSLRs, and if Nikon can pull it off then the D3 will be hand over foot worth the $2000 price difference.
Thanks for the link.. Missed it, and no I am not exclusive to Canon. See my other posts
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1c4fb/1c4fb4a004ac374ae735c210f8560be0dce354ac" alt="Smile :) :)"
.
That's okay... I didn't mean to say you were exclusive to anybody. On the other websites and forums shooters are gawking at the D3, saying it doesn't come close to the 1DSIII, when the camera wasn't intending on aiming that high up the Canon ladder. The D3 matches the 1DIII, not the 1DSIII. And a few posters on those forums asked me for proof that the 3.0" LCD, AF, and other features of the 1DSIII have been reviewed, like they completely forgot that the 1DIII has been out for a few months now. I am sure Canon fixed the AF with the 1DSIII and carried many of the same features over from that body to the 1DSIII.