>This is highly debatable. The pixel density advantage of DX >provides better resolving power than FX and often results in >sharper results where the MP are equal. The only thing FX >had over DX in Nikon's line was high ISO performance, and that >appears to no longer be the case with the D7000.
Just take a picture with FX and DX camera from the same generation and look at them. Or maybe you shouldn't because it may cost you a lot of money... Comparing specs on paper and convincing yourself that DX is good and FX is better only at high ISO will be cheaper. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I traveled with a D90 this summer and tried to convince myself that it's good enough, until I took up the D700 again and looked at the images it makes.