Hey guys, if I ever fork out $8,000 for a D1x body you can officially declare me insane. Oh, it's an awesome camera, but it just misses some (to me) important things that I can find on my F4. Maybe the body that will follow up to the x will indeed have those things...actually I'm certain it'll have those, but for now I have to spend the most on lenses. I've been looking around at some stuff like the 40-400 ED VR Nikkor and the 80-200 ED Nikkor and the 50-500 Sigma, to have one high quality zoom for certain occasions. The VR is around 2.5 times what the mavica costs, the Sigma and 80-200 Nikkor are only less than twice the cost. That is what strikes me the most. But the little digitals were meant as sort of back up / polaroid subsitute cameras, to check some stuff before making a real shot. But that means that the lcd display has the be good enough to be able to judge some stuff. And they aren't. Btw Alpha, I think the Fuji S1 is very overrated. I had a go with it a few months ago, but it shocked me to see that the only big improvement over a D1(x) is the drive speed. Well, optically speaking it's all fine, but I didn't want to start a discussion about analogue vs digital. I started this because I was amazed to see that you can get $800 cameras that are absolute crap. Shame on you, Sony! But when buying a body that passes the $5,000 I think I'd go for medium format all together with perhaps Bronica or