I'm nonplussed.
Its mostly tweaks to make it a better video camera, but as a still shooter there is little need to upgrade from the Mark II.

You beat me to it

Official Canon Page
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Specifications

Not worth it for most photographers-only, but for those who also shoot video, it's pretty much a must have upgrade. The 5D2's video just has too many compromises. Sounds like the 5D3 makes some substantial improvements (but at the cost of tripling the clip size -- of course!).

But I agree, all in all, not a very exciting announcement. This round goes to Nikon. 

The Nikon might look better on paper but the video image is full of aliasing and even some moire. 

I'm not impressed by the 5D 3 for Video either, for stills its great. To bad they decided to charge as much as a video and still camera in one.

The lack of a swivel screen, lack of 60p at 1080 and the price will steer me away from it. 

I won't be buying it.  Hopefully they'll announce a real upgrade soon.

I think the autofocus system in the Mk III is the most interesting thing to me (I don't shoot video) but I don't see anything compelling me to dump my Mark II in the short term. Given the number of new items - new sensor, new shutter mechanism, etc. I'd certainly wait to let other users debug the glitches (my Mark II had to go back to Canon within a week for a fix, and I had waited until Jan 2009 before getting one). It does seem they were aiming mainly at video users though...

Bad joke!  not worth a carrot.  The MP, race is over, the MII 21 MP, is more then  enough for just about everything, I have even done billboard size with it. Even so, you would have thought they come up with something more then just video performance. Nah, poor choice.
Nikon isnt really much better, I also have the D3X and no way would I even consider the D800. Should I need more MP, then I go MF. Simple as that.

I recon both Canon and Nikon have shot themselves in the foot with these upgrades,  MPs, just isnt enough, since we already have that.

we microstockers need pixels! i will consider sell my 7d and buy d800 then make the 5d2 the backup machine.

If I didn't buy a 5D2 last summer this alone "This correction is based on Canon-created lens profiles, up to 29 of which can be downloaded and saved onto the camera. These profiles allow correction not only of lateral CA but also of the harder-to-fix axial CA" would almost make it worth the upgrade. I only use a couple of fast primes and CA is killing me, especially when I have to remove 3 differently coloured aberrations from the high contrast edges

we microstockers need pixels! i will consider sell my 7d and buy d800 then make the 5d2 the backup machine.

Wrong!  microstockers only,  do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely. The XXXL, sales in micro are very few and far in between. Microstock photography is not on par with high flying advertising shoots nor RM photography.

And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.

All this wait for that? Really considering switching to Nikon. Will see .....

Ever considered switching to Hasselblad?  The H4D-31 isn't so expensive ($14,000 with lens).  I'm certainly toying with the idea, perhaps it's more work than it's worth, but the 5D Mark III is a bit underwhelming