Where that live view makes the most sense is on a technical camera... It's not going to draw anybody's eye away from a good SLR viewfinder (except, perhaps, for the histogram in rapidly varying light). On the other hand, it just made tilting and shifting incredibly practical. Couple this with 4x5 image quality (on the 180 for sure - which may even be chasing 5x7, depending on the quality of the scan, and the 160 probably hits 4x5 as well), and this is the most practical (albeit expensive) new view camera in quite a while.
I can't come close to affording one right now, but I've got to say that this is the first camera that might eclipse my D3x for the (landscape and macro) use I put it to. No 35mm-type DSLR has yet come close to equalling the D3x as a landscape camera, and medium format has always been heavier and more fragile for an advantage composed primarily of pixels (and the D3x has a lot of those, too, if not as many as a back). A tech camera with a sliding back is huge and bulky in the field, but this back on a light 2x3 tech camera (or better yet, a 645 tech camera custom designed for digital backs only - hey, Keith Canham, wanna build such a beast?) could actually be smaller and lighter than a D3x, especially with how light view camera lenses are. The live view eliminates the bulkiest, hardest to align and most fragile parts of the tech camera - the ground glass and sliding back. 3 fps live view refresh? It takes 5 mins to set the shot up anyway, so it doesn't matter that it takes a bit of time to see the live view - this isn't video...
-Dan
