And if I'm not mistaken, the 5D2 beat the 1DsIII for image quality, had video, and bunch of other cool stuff, yet it costs $7000+ less.
I think you are mistaken there .... apart from the video and high iso (max 3200) the 1Ds3 is in the field is by far the better camera - it has the pro AF and metering for a start and there is the series 1 weather proofing ...
Brian, re-look at what I said in the context it was stated. No one said the 5D2 was better than the 1Ds.
Obviously the 1Ds3 is overall a way better camera considering all it's functions. The context of the statement was in response to another poster who argued that the 5D3 deserved it's high price given what it will be able to do and that to think it should cost $3000 (or less) ignored all it's advanced functions, etc.:
The only problem I see with that is that Canon said they want to keep the 5D2 in the lineup, and if the 5D3 were only $2500 it seems like no one would buy anymore 5D2's. The specs aren't that far off from the 1DX and that's a $6k+ camera, I don't see why you would expect it to be $4000 less.
I simply pointed out that the 5D2 outperformed the 1Ds3 in terms of image quality, ISO, and had video features not found in any camera, at a price that was $7000+ less than the 1Ds3. The poster's logic was flawed in his reasoning when an obvious example of great technology and functionality was previously available for $7k+ less.
Re-read the full posting, I think you'll understand my point.