I tried a 5D extensively today. The full frame is a nice feature, however I think the full frame technology might not of grown up yet. The color rendition I got looked very lickable.... apart from that I find the price of 2300€ to high. I also tried the 30D which I must say I am really impressed with, also at high ISO (1600) The 400d felt really cheap, didn't even look at further.
I still have this thing with Nikon however, the D80 seems nicely priced for what you get. I dropped the Pentax and Sony off the shortlist for lack of lenses, this compared to Canon and Nikon.
I have now decided to go for VR (nikon) or IS (canon) lenses, I like the Nikon D80 with 17-55 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 VR, although a rather expensive investment.....
I like the Canon D30 with the 70-200 4.0L IS and the 24-70 2.8 this will be cheaper than the Nikon, but will also miss a bit of "wide" also the 30D is slightly outdated.
As far as I see it I think i would use a 70-200mm 80% of the time, the other stuff would be mostly family and holiday things .... most of which I will still do with my Leica M and film, or my beloved wife' digicam. So from this perspective i would go for the Nikon 70-200 VR which seems like a really good lens (quality wise) and will suit my needs, for 80% at least. Depending on how I fare with digital I can always see what shorter lens I would be interested in...... budget wise I could then easily go for the D200 instead of the 80, thus bringing my "might be" choice to the D200 and the 70-200 2.8 VR ......
Perhaps get the sigma 30mm 1.4 to go with it ....
I liked the Canon 70-200 4.0 IF which stopped down the whole way, thus 4.0 made excellently sharp images, they didn't have the 2.8 for me to test, but the sales guy told me I might need to stop down 1 stop to get chrystal clear images
All makes sense no ?
So still contemplating, I will most definately let you know what i decide..