Personally, I think there is no right answer.
It depends on so many things.
From what I have done and read so far, one can still achieve “good” (it is a very relative word) results with low cos consumer grade cameras.
We ha quite an interesting discussion on different cameras and techniques here recently:
Accuracy and speed. I’m impressed.
My stuff was done with Panasonics DMC FZ-28 and LX100, both not very “serious”, but the results are more than ok for my purpose.
40-70 m structures with an accuracy of a couple mm is in order I would think.
I shot with IS, AF and even distortion correction (LX100).
I guess that the better your camera is, the less problems you might get during alignment and so need to spend less time correcting that. I still need to do some testing with RAW vs. JPG, many of the examples in the link are actually done with JPGs…
So if your aim is e.g. to get models from natural stuff likes rocks or plants in the jungle where you need to carry a lot and the camera might suffer from the environmental conditions, then you might be better off with a cheaper camera.
If you do high-end aerial mapping or work in industrial design and need to squeeze the last half percent of accuracy and 20% of speed out, then you might want equipement for 10-20k euros.
My point is don’t throw all of your budget at the camera if you don’t need to.
BTW, does anyone have experience with Fujifilm sensors?