I get confused with the DX v crop comparison. Until recently I have not considered a D800, but would rather wait for the D300s upgrade. However, talk of being able to capture a large pixel image in DX mode with the D800 interests me. Having one camera to use for all my genres of photography is also attractive.
Firstly, is there any real proof that cropping results in the same quality of image as taken in DX? I have used DX crop on my D700 and apart from the small file size noticed little difference at all between FX crop and DX.
Secondly, I am also interested that Nikon have designated a grey border around the DX area making it easier to define the subject between FX and DX, will this make a difference do you think to elimating missed subject matter creeping into the FX area?
Finally, my principal reason for discounting the D800 was the frame rate, but that alone is largely addressed by extra fps in DX mode.
What I'm really trying to say is I have a dilemma. Do I consider keeping my D7000 as a spare body and transfer my wildlife work to a D800 along with my landscape and architectural work currently covered by my D700. Or, wait for the D300s replacement and trade my D7000 to finance it. Of course really the answer is wait and see when the D300s replacement arrives.
Except, e-bay has exploded with the sales of second hand D700 bodies and they are going for highly respectable prices, in fact some low shutter count bodies selling for 72% of a new body price! I don't want to miss out on the high resale values while I procrastinate On the down side London Camera Exchange are offering only 50% trade in on a D700. In fairness there are no seller fees with a trade in.
The reality check is of course that no one knows what we get until the first users post the first images in DX crop so then can be compared. For that matter we still await an FX image also.