I really don't understand Nikon's thinking. Evidently they just want a camera equally priced to the Canon IDs Mark III. Aside from the sensor and related parts, this camera is in essence a D3. I would not be surprised if the two cameras were the same on the assembly line, the D3x taking a detour for the different sensor.

If Canon's 5D Mark II comes close to same image quality, they will blow the D3x out of the water. Some will buy the camera just because they want the prestige of having the most expensive. Few pros will ever be able to make enough added revenue from having one to make it pay for itself.

I too will look at the Sony A900 before even thinking of buying such an expensive camera. Question is, if Sony can produce something that matches {at least in specs} for $5000.00 less, do you really think Nikon has that much more invested? Nikons name isn't worth that much in my opinion.

There is a move on in the photographic circle to shun this camera until the price becomes competitive. The dropping price on the IDs Mark III is proof that super high camera prices have a tough time making it in the USA.