I think we may need to step back a little and make sure that, in stating our individual conclusions and preferences, we don't denigrate those who may take a different view.

To that end, let me just explain why I am not considering a D7000, whilst acknowledging that it looks like a fantastic camera...

I currently use a combination of D700 and D300. The D300 get used for wildlife and aviation shots, because of its greater pixel density, and for vacations and "walking around" with a 16-85mm DX lens, because of its lighter weight. I use both cameras side-by-side for shooting low-light theatrical productions. I have no use for video.

I'm looking to replace the D300 at some point in the next 12 months. For vacations, the D7000 would be ideal, but that's wouldn't be the camera's only use. For wildlife/aviation and theatre, I'd like a 12MP DX camera or an 18-20MP FX camera that can match the D700 in noise performance at up to ISO 6400, or even exceed it. The D7000 might be good enough at high-ISO, but unfortunately a few things rule it out. For me, the following things are not trivial...

1. Compatibility with the MB-D10 grip
2. Compatibility with the EN-EL3e battery
3. Similarity of control layout with the D700
4. At least one CF card slot
5. An AF-ON button and an AE-L/AF/L button
6. A method of saving four separate sets of Custom Settings (etc.)
7. An AF system that works at least as well as the D700 in low light
(the D7000 may be OK on this one, we don't know yet)

So, that's why I'm waiting to see what a D300s replacement might be like. These are my reasons, they may not apply to anyone else.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian
Check out the Nikonians Team pages