One issue no one seems to have mentioned yet is the difference in size and weight. I think this is another 'real world' difference you asked about. OK, there is not such a big difference in the bodies, but there is in lenses. For example, the 10-24mm DX is much smaller than the 14-24mm FX. I note you use the 70-200mm f/2.8 which has 300mm 'reach' on DX, to get 300mm f/2.8 on FX requires a much heavier and more expensive lens.

I went from a D300 to the D700 and, to be honest, I regret the move. The D700 is a wonderful camera, but the additional cost, size and weight of the move were not worth it for me. Note, that is "for me" and everyone will have their own views. I am now waiting to see what Nikon do (if anything) in terms of upgrades to the D300 and D700, and the 17-55mm, before I make a decision on which way to go next.

Bill
North Berwick, Scotland

My Website - My Nikonians Gallery

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.