Everybody is mentioning the 5DII and the A900 as if those were the D3X's competitors. Well, I'm sorry, but they aren't. Not in Nikon's mind, and it shouldn't be in your minds either since the only thing that we currently know they have in common is sensor resolution.
And for many people that will be why they bought them. The 1Ds is often used as a studio camera and a MF replcement, so the Sony A900 and the 5DII are indeed it's competitors now.
The $7K-$8K price range at introduction still makes sense for cameras that claim to challenge MF backs in what they deliver to the pro. Target audience: A couple of Pro niches (+ the dentists) as it has always been with the 1Ds series.
and like pros bopught the 1Ds instead of MF cameras, some will now buy 5DII/Sony A900s instead of the 1Ds.
So wishful thinking is one thing, realistic thinking is another... Who's on crack now?
Nikon fanbois it would appear!
If Nikon had introduced this when the 1DSII appeared, I doubt there would have been so much of a fuss, but it appears to be a little lacking by today's standards/competition. And as $8000 usually translates into £8000 over here, I doubt many of them will sell in UK if that is the case, as most photographers [all over the world] who wanted high-res 35mm kit will have switched to Canon a long time ago.
If however the image quality is way, way better than the Canon, then they would have an advantage. But is it too little to late for that part of the market - advertising or studio photographers.