"Look at who should buy this camera [1DX]:
1. Professional newspaper or magazine photographers who shoot sports
2. Staff photographers at a National Geographic-type publication
3. Lotto winners"
I really don't think the author of the article looked at the big picture of life and what people spend money on. Nor did he look at the divergent needs of photographers (pros, hobbyists, and everything in between).
I have a friend who is into snowmobiling and spends $13k every couple of years on a new snowmobile. I have another couple of friends who are into hunting and fishing and they spend countless dollars on making sure they have new quads, boats, gear and GPS devices. Not to mention all these guys have trucks and trailers to pull their toys and the gas to drive all of them. On the other side of the coin a friend of my wife spends thousands on clothes every year and in the past 5 years has spent $20k on plastic surgery.
In light of all of this I think spending $6000 for a 1DX is a very reasonable price. Sure lenses cost money, but at the same time they have a relatively long life span. Buying a 1DX doesn't require that you be a professional or a lottery winner. It comes down to priorities, I don't spend $13k on snowmobiles or other toys, instead I save my money for my hobby, photography.
"Who needs a camera this good and this expensive? Certainly the No. 1 user would be the photographer who shoots sports for a living, where there’s a need for speed in low light conditions, like dimly lighted outdoor football fields or dingy indoor arenas. Over the years, this has probably been the best advancement in the digital technology I have seen. These cameras have brought available-light photo journalism to a new level, so far past the days of film or the infancy of digital technology."
With this comment the author doesn't give any thought or consideration that I would want a 1DX to take pictures of my kids playing sports in those same indoor dingy arenas and poorly lit soccer fields or instead should I be forced to use a P&S with a flash at the side of a hockey rink shooting into the glass (for those who've never seen this, think of shooting with a flash on into a window) like some parents I see?
The author goes on to mention the 5DII and T3i, and he describes the latter as being realistically priced. Sure, I'd love to only have to spend $800 on a T3i and a kit lens. But, just try using that, or a 5DII for that matter, to take fast moving action sport shots in a poorly lit indoor arenas and let me know how it turns out. I'm not going to buy a 1DX (or a 5DIII/5DX if the specs work for me) just for the sake of having a high end camera, I could care less about that. I'm going to buy one because I find my present one (60D) lacking in low light conditions and the 1DX is the only camera that has Fast AF, low noise at high ISO (based on specs alone at this time), and good FPS, which is exactly what I need to capture those special moments of my children and their friends playing sports. It was for this same reason -right tool for the job- that I bought my 70-200 2.8 IS II; granted I now love that lens for much more than just taking sports shots.
In the end I think the author offers a very short sighted view of photography and people in general.