Maybe I'm just a cheapskate; if so, so be it. Maybe I value my dollars differently than others. Anyway, I've decided I can't justify 3500 Tracy dollars for the 5D3.
As I said here several times before the 5D2 successor showed up, rather than speculating/hoping/fantasizing, I would wait to see what Canon offered, then make a decision about what to do. After limping along for two years with T2i limitations, I knew I wanted an affordable tool that would provide 5D2 image quality and low-light capabilities with 7D or better autofocus speed and versatility.
The new 5D3 has delivered exactly what I want. Low-light capability seems at least marginally improved and the AF is all I would ever need. Despite hearing some whining about sensor capabilities, dynamic range, etc., I suspect Canon realizes this sensor produces image quality better than what a large percentage of users actually need or can use. It surely produces images that satisfy me. So, from a practical standpoint, the 5D3 is my ideal camera.
Only Canon knows why they've priced the 5D3 as they have. I can speculate along with everyone else, but the improvements over the 5D2 don't warrant the additional cost for me. I can see a wedding photographer biting his lip and paying the extra money because the critical improvements give him reasonable value. There may be some other businesses that see it as a reasonable (affordable -- and also available) alternative to the new 1Dx. So, for me, I've decided on my own current solution. It's the 7D with some lens upgrades.
The plan that's evolved as a cheaper 5D3 solution for me is this:
1. Replace the T2i with a new 7D.
2. Upgrade (my interpretation) my walkaround lens from the 15-85mm to a 17-55mm.
3. Upgrade my 70-200 f/4.0L to a 70-200 f/4.0L IS.
4. Get a 10-22mm for the wide side.
I've got an ef-s 60mm that's adequate for macro, but I'll keep it mostly for the non-macro look it provides. I don't know what it is, but that has become a favorite lens for landscape type shots. I'll keep my 135mm f/2.0L for serious headhunting, and I'll keep the 100-400L for the great reach.
This also allows me to sell the EOS-1V as I won't need it for the great AF. Yesterday I was shooting around town with the T2i in one hand and the 1V in the other (with the 70-200) and it's speed is nothing short of joy. The contrast between the two helped make this decision.
One reason I got the T2i initially was that it was the cheapest entry to a decent digital camera. It has virtually the same sensor as the 7D, so if you can sacrifice the upscale capabilities of the 7D you can work with a T2i and good lenses. Here's an image that makes that case for me:
That was taken yesterday with the T2i and has all the IQ I'd ever realistically need. However that is one of perhaps 50 I took of gulls flying around me. The AF simply can't do the job; this shot just got lucky. With a 7D, this shot won't require luck -- or a one out of fifty keeper ratio. And as I've often said, for street photography, by the time the T2i gets it together, the shot is gone. I saw that again yesterday with the lightning speed of the 1V. Even using film, as soon as the shutter button is actuated, the shot is made.
Anyway, perhaps this will help others wrestling with the 5D3 pricing. If you're thinking about Nikon, well that's a different issue!