The nikon 24-70mm 2.8 costs $800 more than I bought my new 24-70mm f2.8 L last year
Nikon makes no 300mm f4 VR and my IS 300mm f4 IS eos costs less than nikon no VR available new.
My 70-200mm 2.8 IS ran me $300 less than nikon VR and it unlike the nikon does not vignette on full frame and unlike nikon I can fully use canon extention tubes with full metadata full autofocus and image stabilization for macro.
I added the nikon D700 just to properly drive the 14-24mm 2.8 Nano Coat ED I bought at same time to beat nikon Feb 1st 2009 price increases.
I like my Canon, Nikon & Pentax gears.
IF the 645D launches for $18,000 with one lens then thats more than I paid for everything I bought since March 2008 brand new, including a K20D ;^)
Anyways I don't live in Japan so Pentax wouldn't want me to buy a 645D if I wanted to.
Originally posted by kenyee LOL. And she hasn't castrated you yet? Get the 645D
Why in the world are you keeping the 5D? I can understand jumping to a used one from the Pentax world because it's relatively inexpensive, but if you have the D700 as well, I'd ditch the 5D and find a Nikon 24-70 lens and call it a day...