Feel is...crap...considering the grand sceme of things.
You want a camera that is going to perform how you want it too. If a person is planning on shooting sports and they're looking at Canon, then there are certain cameras they'd want to rul out. They'd probably end up with a 40D. But if they were buying based on feel and though the XTI was better because of less weight and a smaller design, then they'd be buying for completely wrong reasons.
Buying based on feel should be low on a person's priority list and shouldn't factor into their decision until they've narrowed down their choices to cameras based on features.
True, a camera noob won't know what to look for in the way of features unless they research, but then again that's not our fault.
There was a guy on one of the forums I frequent that was asking how to use live view on the camera he just bought. He purchased a camera that doesn't have live view based on several people saying "Buy what feels best." That's a rare occurence but if he would have looked at the features instead of being a complete impulse buyer, then he would have gotten the camera he needed.
Live view is a nice bonus if you're lazy or don't have other proper equipment (I'd like live view, so don't mistake my comment for disagreement on whether or not it's a nifty feature) in order to get the kinds of shots you can get with it.. but it's not the be all end all feature for cameras, especially considering that there are not DSLR's which also have a full swivel lcd.
And feel is crap ? Wow, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried to be. And that is fact. A photographer holds his camera ALL DAY LONG, in varying climatic conditions, which will eventually present a challenge to someone with a camera that feels uncomfortable to begin with, whether it be that the grip is too small/big or the ergonomics of the layout is illogical to them.
If you were an Olympic marathon runner, would you wear a pair of Nike Jordan high tops because they had the best features in a sneaker ? No, you'd wear a running shoe that was comfortable, right ? Same thing. If you're buying a guitar, would you buy the one with the fretboard that caused you to over stretch your fingers because the neck was too wide, but was the coolest color you've ever seen, or would you get the one that you were able to put your index finger across all the way without effort, but wasn't as cool a color as the one that will eventually cause you carpal tunnel, amongst other things ?
Never should anyone new to photography listen to the advice you've given, as it is far too trivial for a list of priorities. Most of the above $1k cameras on the market will yield very similar results in terms of photo quality IF you know how to shoot your subjects. I can get fantastic results out of my measly Canon S3IS, because I know the camera well. I know what it can and can not do.
As for features.. Let's take the FPS feature. Is the person buying the camera a pro? Will he/she be using it for professional sporting events which will be published ? Sure, 6.5 fps vs 5 fps is a step up, but in the "grand scheme" of things, it's something I'd sacrifice in order to be able to hold the camera all day long without feeling like my hand is rotting off or sore etc..
Live view. Very useful and convenient but.. an absolute necessity ? Funny how this feature hasn't been needed by thousands of pro shooters over the years. So don't act as if you can't be a photographer without it.. .that's silly. I love live view on my S3, but if I told you that I could count how many times I've used it on both hands, I'd not be lying.
It's great for macro shot situations in positions I'd normally be hard pressed to reach without a good tripod.. but therein lies the key word.. good tripod. Good tripod + shutter release button= no live view needed. As a matter of fact, there are times I'd MUCH rather have my camera hanging upside down, in a tight spot than have me hunching over all twisted in some weird position in order to look at the LCD.
Furthermore, it's all about the glass. I don't care what camera you possess. If the glass is crap, there are no amount of features you can throw at the body, which will redeem the quality of your final product. So again, "features" take a back seat here.
In the end, AFTER build quality (because what good is a camera that will fail because of dust getting in the cracks, or will fail after a drop), and ergonomics, anybody would find it easy to compare and then find VERY similar "features" in any decent DSLR, give or take a thing or two that they could easily do without, given that they :
Know the subject matter they're shooting
understand how an (d)SLR works
use good quality glass
has technical (not just theoretical) and in the field knowledge
Doug
