What I mean is, if Nikon offered a the D3’s FX sensor in the D300’s form factor, the only meaningful difference would be the ergonomics, smaller form factor, lack of dual CF slots, and a few other small details.

For most, that wouldn’t be enough to justify the premium of the D3, assuming a D10 sold for around $3000 and the D3 maintained its market price.

If you look at the 5D, for years it offered what was arguably the best quality from the Canon line of DSLRs, but offered a distinctly different product due to its build quality, slow frame rate, etc. Thus, even at a market price between $2000 and $3000, it didn’t directly compete with the 1D and 1Ds lines.

For example: “In the case of a D10, I’m sure there would be some market differentiators, otherwise Nikon would cannibalize sales of the flagship” — can you explain this a little more?

I would like to thank R.E.M. for teaching me the word “eponymous.” Incidentally, seeing R.E.M. on their tour for Monster was the first concert I attended.

I’m glad to hear you enjoyed the write-up, too. I never aim to critique the music, but just provide a little context for the images, so I’m glad the words and images put you at the show!

Thanks for the feedback on the images, too. There are a few images I’m satisfied with, but wow, the lighting was difficult.