Dan, I'm firmly in the Nikon camp even though I have next to nothing invested in glass. Nikon to me means photography. Canon means photocopiers and printers, while Sony brings memories of junky clock radios and crappy HiFi gear.

However, there's no denying the stunning images that come out of the OLD 5D which compare more than favorably to the much more expensive Nikon D3 and the somewhat more expensive D700.

I think the new 5D is going to keep Canon the leader in wedding photography both as a primary body and secondary.

Nikon need a faster processor, even to deal with the sensors and lower resolutions they have in place. More pixels while important for marketing is a specification that's far from useless. Unresolved pixels are next to useless, but given a low noise and a clean image, you can't argue with more data, if for nothing else than just cropping room.

I just want to see all this competition bring cameras like the D700 down to the mid 1000's and D3's and 1Ds's to below 3000.

With regards to Sony, they make so little else that's any good, that there's no way I could take a chance on one of their cameras. Especially when they're still holding on to their proprietary MemoryStick format that has been useless from the day it was conceived (it's always been lower capacity, slower and larger dimensionally than the competition).

As far as larger sensors go, I'd love to see an abandonment of the 35mm frame equivalent. It's still a hold-over that was a matter of convenience when it was first introduced. Let's see a sensor as large as possible within a modern SLR body. Yes, that will bring negative crop factor with current full-frame glass. And the possibility of additional glass expense for newer toys... But damn, a 6x4cm sensor in a D700-sized SLR would be SWEET. For that matter a 6x6.