Yes, I agree with that, but I'm still allowed to think it's BS from a customer p.o.v. I hate spending $6800 on a camera every two years, only to know that they COULD have done it better, and that I pay that kind of money from a small upgrade.Then why spend $6800 on a new camera? Why not just buy the previous model for a cheaper price when the new one comes out?
That scenario likely fits a lot of people. However, for some photographers, the ability to get a shot that they could not get before might mean a big payday that makes the cost of the camera body look like chump change.
I'm not going to judge what someone else buys based on my needs for a camera body. I was, however, ready to buy a 1D MK IV when the actual RAW images were made available, and the high ISO, which is what I need, was inferior to my 5D MK II.
I'll wait and see on this one as well. If its two stops better than a 5D MK II, that is amazing (I'm in doubt). It would upgrade all of my lenses by two stops. For me, thats not even possible, but if it were, it would cost 10X the cost of a 1Dx.
Certainly, the image on the rear LCD is not useful in judging the high ISO capability. Its a jpeg image and might have a ton of NR that washes away any fine details. That was the case with the 1D MK IV, and the RAW images told the real story.