OOOOH! I want one. Thanks for the link Don.

According to Arthur Morris the 1DMK3 could Revolutionise wildlife photography. He's claiming ISO 3200 on the new model is about the same as ISO 400 on the 1DsMK2 and has some very nice shots to prove it.

Online pictures I have seen back up that claim.

Anyone here not moving to Canon? I'm going to have to buy some Canon stickers to put on my gear. It's the closest I can afford. No-one will know the difference.

OK, I will go against the flow. I have no need of any features the MIII offers over what I have in the D2X. If I won the lottery on Wednesday I would get a few of the to me, currently exotic in that they are unaffordable, Nikon A/F lenses and then maybe consider a Hasselblad or maybe a Sinar or Linhof with a Leaf digital back :D :D :D

Don

I had to chuckle at the sound of the high speed drive on the Mark III........certainly that frame rate has been done before...but what's missing this time is the sound of film perforations being split or/and the end of the film being wrenched from the spool! lol

Yelvertoft/ Duncan,
Far from it for me to poo poo Nikon cameras, as I actually prefer them to Canon's...BUT....The D40 had some issues....we all preferred the older D50 at work, plus the inconvenience of the D40 with some D lenses, plus a weird habit of too many of these babies coming back for premature repairs/ exchanges, mainly due to firmware and electronic issues, we're all glad they're going.
It's a shame Nikon got rid of the D50 so quickly, I personally rated it higher....I just hope the D40x has had the issues we saw with the D40 ironed out.
The concept is excellent, and most D40' s are....just a few bad eggs spoilt it I think.

Memories of setting the MD2 to 36 then loading a 24 exp roll in the dark. :D :D

Don

The Nikon F2 high speed camera could hit 10 FPS with the MD-100 motor drive. Nikon cameras also had bulk film backs that could hold 250 or 750 frames of film. Imagine shooting that lot then realising you have set the wrong ISO ...