I totally agree that good glass should come before a really expensive body. But now owning a 5d mkiii and a 7d before that. I'm kind of rethinking the idea. With the new 5d you can get close to canons top of the line image quality without spending thousands more on 1d's or 1ds's.
Just say a friend has just inherited a sum of money and has always wanted to get Into photography. His budget is $5000. counting New prices on bhphoto, my recommendations would be between the two:
1: 7d body, 24-70mm f2.8l, and 70-200mm f2.8l IS ii
2: 5d mark iii kit with 24-105mm f4l IS, and 70-200mm f4L
They both roughly come out to $5000. You get better glass if you go with the 7d, but you get much better image quality and performance with the 5diii. Add in that the lenses you get with the 5d are really great lenses also. Having had all of this equipment before (the 70-200 was mk1 though). I would have to recommend the 5d package. Either one would be fantastic to own, but I give the edge to the 5d. The clean ISO makes up the difference on the faster lenses I think.
It's just my opinion that things change with time. I think middle of the line glass on a higher end body can outperform A 60d/7d with top of the line glass. And with canon starting to embed limitations on the older lenses when attached to newer bodies, it only makes my idea more logical. No one is going to buy 5diii and only have a 50mm 1.8, they are going to go with a reasonable lens. And I think a nice reasonably priced lens on a 5diii would outperform a 7d with a high end L lens.
What are others thoughts on the matter? I know this is a touchy subject and I'm not saying either one is wrong. I would smile for days if some one gave me either of those setups. I just want to hear others thoughts on the subject.
This is just a scenario. I'm talking about a nice setup to cover the basic ranges.