sploo wrote in post #15082911
That's the problem (which I think Shadowblade has previous pointed out); Canon doesn't exist in isolation.
There's nothing wrong with them having a 5D3 in the $3500 range, and a potential high DR/high MP body in the $4500-5000 range. It's just that the $2000 D600 exists, and is arguably closer in "intention" to the 5D3 than the D800. A future high MP body would considered by the market as a competitor to the D800, which at $3000 would compare very favourably with a $4500+ Canon body.
No, Canon does not exist in isolation, but that doesn't mean the D600 is a 5D3. Sure, the argument is there that the 5D3 is overpriced - it was there from the start with the D800 being $500 less expensive for all those shiney MPs. However, to say/imply as some have that the 5D3 will be over priced until it loses $1,000* off MSRP is silly.
We've seen it time and time again that Canon knows how to make a kickin' camera. The 60D vs. D7000 has shown that, while Nikon has the headlines, the 60D is an extremely capable camera, probably moreso than the D7000. Likewise with the 5D3 vs. D800. This is not to say the Nikon cameras above are bad, far from it. However, sensors aside**, Canon puts their cameras into the marketplace where they intend them to be. Just because they don't have the headline-grabbing specs doesn't mean they don't belong in their respective market segments.
* Totally made up dollar amount. I've seen some suggestions that the 5D3 should indeed lose that much off it's price, but not many are going that far.
** Yes, the sensor is a very important part of the camera, and we all know Sony is King. Canon would do well to either buy Sony sensors (unlikely), or, sometime very soon, show what's up their sleeves. While I wouldn't say Canon has a bad sensor, they are clearly being outclassed here.