I've ordered one already. To me the supposed 1-stop cleaner ISO, cross focus on all AF points and the more-sensitive/accurate sensors for f/2.8 lenses are a must-buy for me.

Hate the fact they upped the MP count to 10, though. I don't need it. I've printed 40"x60" from my 30D (8.2 MP) without any perceptible degradation.

What prices are you seeing for the 40D? I recently purchased a 30D so I won't be upgrading anytime soon.

currently all Canadian outlets are selling the 40D for $1,399 (Vistek, Aden, Henry's, Amazing Photo). Usually the price drops a tad after the first wave orders have been fulfilled. Amazing Photo, for example, will get 10 units of 40D for their initial order. I don't even get the first 10 units (they're ordered by an insurance company or something like that). I've put a $1,000 downpayment, however, to ensure I'll get the 11th unit they received.

I'm still satisfied with my 20D but i have to admit that the Nikon D300 looks amazing. 51 AF points! For an action photographer, 1D performance in a 2000$ body is incredible.

I'm not saying that the D300 will not be as good as the 1DmkIII, however, having 51 AF point is not enough. Accuracy and speed plus predictive AF algorithm have to be as good as the 1DmkIII to make it worth while.

The 20-lens user calibration memory is very tempting, though. :) I can just rent instead of buying lenses.

I am very happy with my 30D right now, but I will see what I do once the camera is on the market and the reviews are in. It does have some nice features, larger buffer DIGI 3 & some weather sealant. But I am not a fan of live preview and is a totally pointless add on for me.

I'm seriously considering the 40D--I have a 350D right now, and the 40D would be a fairly substantial upgrade for me.

The two biggest 40D features I'm interested in are the bigger buffer, and better autofocus. The 350D buffer when shooting RAW is only 5 images, versus 17 for the 40D (of course, at 6.5 fps the 40D will be able to fill that bigger buffer pretty quickly).

Other useful features from my perspective include the bigger LCD (the 1.8" display on the 350D is pretty tiny), improved high-ISO capability, and a better viewfinder. The bump to 10MP is useful, but not very significant.

I haven't had too many problems with the very small 350D form factor, but the 40D (like it's 30D and 20D predecessors) looks to be somewhat more comfortable to hold. I'm looking forward to reading some actual reviews and trying one out once the 40D starts appearing in stores.

Even if you just upgrade from your 350D to 30D the AF improvement is tremendous. I also had the 400D, still the AF of 400D vs 30D is better on the 30D. Buffer is not needed for me because even with action shots I rarely use motor-drive, I only use single-shot mode.

I've been holding out for a price drop on the 5D but with the introduction of the 40D I might make the leap after the price drops a bit.

I love my 10D, but it just doesn't focus fast enough for moving subjects.
I'm hoping the 40D is much improved. Lower noise at ISO 400 and 800 would be a plus too. So I'm likely going to grab one after the experts test and review it.

Icemann, the 5D price should drop a bit once the 6 or 7D comes out.

Are you aware of the $350 mail in rebate aviable on the 5D?
You would have to buy it quickly it ends sept 3rd
http://www.canon.ca/english/index-whatsnew.html
click on special offers & promotions

talljak, yes, I'm aware of the rebate. I just wanted it to eventually drop into the low $2K's. I've heard rumours that 5D successor is not coming anytime soon so I just might make the leap to the 40D even though I really want a full frame sensor.

Having used both (FF and 1.6 sensors), I honestly believe that the FF advantage is overrated. I've taken the same product picture using a 5D and a 30D, both blownup to 40"x60" and NOBODY can tell the difference.

FF is an advantage if you want to shoot wide angles with a 24 to 28mm lens.

alternatively you can get a 40D with 10-22 EF-S lens. It'll stil be cheaper than getting a 5D body only :)

David, I do like the 1.6 FOVCF when I'm using my 100-400 but it doesn't really have the FOV I want when using my 17-40. Do you have the 10-22 and how does it compare to an L-lens?

Yea there are no solid rumors on a 5D replacement anytime soon. With the 40D and the Mark III & Mark III 1DS just out I think it will be a bit before we see a smaller full frame replacement.
If canon follows the 18 month replacement time line we are over due for a 5D replacement. but since the 1Ds just came out with FF at 21mp a 5d replacement may be a while off or never.
The 5D retails for about 3300 before any rebates I don't see it being reduced by a 1000 dollars unless you buy used.
but if it does I will be right in line behind you to get one.

David, I do like the 1.6 FOVCF when I'm using my 100-400 but it doesn't really have the FOV I want when using my 17-40. Do you have the 10-22 and how does it compare to an L-lens?
the 10-22 is amazingly good. Just like 17-55 f/2.8 IS and EF-S 60mm macro. The only 2 reasons they're not considered L series are due to their built quality and they're EF-S. Quality wise, I retire my 17-40 and 24-105 for the 17-55 f/2.8 IS and 10-22. The lenses are THAT good.

Hmm, I'll have to take a look at those lenses. I like the 17-55 for the f2.8 and IS. I guess I have to decide if I want to invest in EF-S lenses and go with a 1.6x camera or buck up and go for a FF and stick with my L lenses.

it really depends on your shooting and printing style. I still keep my 5D and 100mm f/2.8 USM macro for product shots because I do need to enlarge the images that size (billboards, banners and such) but other than that I never use FF anymore. Furthermore, FF tend to attract dust more than 1.6 camera. Don't know why. Also it's more of a PITA cleaning the sensor than the 1.6 sensor.