>Len points out that technically there is no difference, LOL... "Len" does not say that What I say is in a 20 inch wide print from the whole of the picture area using good lenses there is no difference in image quality between a D300 and a D3 other than occasional nit picking with sometimes the D300 winning to 1600 ISO. That is my experience. It is also the experience of top world class Nikon specialists like Grays of Westminster. Pixel peepers at sizes equivalent to a garage door may be able to detect some differences - but in the context of a 20 inch wide print - a good standard for many photographers - I can detect no difference - neither than Grays or as far as I can tell the whole of the UK photographic press. I do not think anybody is claiming a D700 is superior to a D3
Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.