This is a tough place. You put quotes around something I didn't say. If you want to debate what I said then do so. Don't invent what I said. Lenses make images. Bodies just hold film or sensors. Lenses of differnet sorts can provide creative tools to the photographer. Bodies pretty much provide gimmicks. I wish could buy a Nikon FM2 with a sensor in it. Simple, easy to use, no menus, mechanical shutter, foolproof. The only requirements are an understanding of exposure and focus. So I would always go for the lens. However, if he is going to change formats, then doing it now would make sense to me and that would mean a new body. It is hard to imagine how a new body would improve his images, assuming competence at operating the current body. A new lens almost always will. Now debate that rather than "only reason to upgrade body etc."
Sorry the +1 was to Fmw and his quote to your take. And many will disagree with you is just fine. As that what makes it interesting. Yes glass is important as should always be first consideration. But there are times that needed features and controls are just as important in getting the shot. the smaller and darker pentmirror vs larger brighter pentaprism for easier composition which is also a big consideration of the old film bodies you prefer. Faster AF acquisition for moving subjects. Which would you prefer for events,weddings,photojournalist type needs a entry camera or a D300 or D7000?
My stance is right body & right glass for the job. As glass is significant for delivering the best to the sensor. But the ability of the body to minimize the time making adjustments and eliminate any time delay in getting the shot. To needed features like FPS,Fast AF,Bracketing off shoe flash control. Without the extra cost and extra equipment to work around those lacking features.
.
