Yup, probably loaded with HD video capabilities that I will never use, but will have to pay for.
I'll sit and wait for six months when its finally released, just to see what the critiques, naysayers, tooth fairy and all the others have to say about it. Right now my D700 takes damn fine pics, even when printed at 20x24 and larger!
I'd rather put the cash into some new lenses!!! That 200 f/2 and 14mm f/2.8D look mighty fine...
A couple weeks ago there was an interview with Nimesh Thakkar of Nikon India posted on another web site. When asked about a D700s or D700x, he replied "At present, there are no plans to replace Nikon D700." Of course he also said the same thing about the D90. Apparently Nikon does not technically consider the D7000 to be a D90 replacement.
"A problem well stated is a problem half solved" Charles F. Kettering
I love to hear this! It means there may be numerous used "cherry" D700s out on the use market sooner that I can snap up my choice from. Or maybe I'll grab a new one from the last inventory. NAS serves us all!
I just picked up a brand new D700, because I already know that the D700 is a better camera than I am a photographer. I will be able to do pretty much anything I need to with the D700. What else will a new version give me???????
For me, I'd love to see the D3s sensor live on in the D700. More MP isn't all that important to me (however, competing with Canon may not allow that to happen). If the D700 were to eventually get the D3s sensor, then I guess it means that we won't see that till there is a D4.
As many have already said, the D700 is now "good enough", but that D3s has just a smidgen better low-light response. Anyway still dreaming, reality may bite soon in the form of a D700.
Took a first stab at a differences summary. There are more things - I just focused on what was particularly important to me when comparing it to my D300S.
Of all of these things there are some that I do like over my D300S but quite a few that I don't. Of course, different people will come up with different things they like/don't like.
What I do like : Slightly higher MP - better ISO - bracketing up to 2EV ( easier for HDR work, but I'm normally using my D700 for that type of work anyway )
What I don't like: No 10 point terminal ( I use that quite a bit on the D300S ) - 9 cross sensors instead of 15 - 39 AF points instead of 51 - 6FPS instead of 8 - No separate C and S switch - No mirror up shutter release mode - New EN-EL15 battery ( I finally have all 3 bodies that use the same EN-EL3e battery. I will guess that future bodies will most likely be using this new battery design ).
For myself I guess I will have to wait and see what is coming down the pipe for a D300S replacement.
It's an interesting discussion, but I think most of us are asking when the D700 upgrade comes will it have a bigger sensor. I asked a question on the D7000 forum about this, because I enjoy wildlife I could do with a more pixels populated sensor on both my D700 and D90 for bird flight crops. The question is, do I? Are they going to be "good" pixels or just lots of pixels? My meaning here has a point I think when I look at the replacement for the Coolpix P6000, the P7000. OK, not a dSLR, but I've got one and I shoot in RAW on it and I print superb 16 x 12inch from it. I use it as a weekend hand luggage camera.
My point is this, in the world of the pixel chaser we have just seen Nikon replace the P6000 Image sensor 1/1.7-in. CCD; total pixels: approx. 13.93 million, with the P7000 1/1.7-in. type CCD; total pixels: approx. 10.39 million! A pixel reduction of nearly 25%. The major difference between the two seems to be the zoom capabilty P6000 = 4x Zoom-NIKKOR; 6.0-24.0mm (35mm format picture angle: 28-112mm against the P7000 7.1x zoom NIKKOR; 6.0-42.6mm (35mm format picture angle: 28-200mm). I suppose it's arguable that with the P7000's greater zoom the cropping is less so the image is bigger.
I know it's not comparing apples with apples so to speak, but it does show that Nikon is not always designing it's cameras for the pixel chasers.
I still think my D700 is without any doubt the finest camera I have ever owned. As for HD Video, yep when it comes it will have it, but on the basis I've also got a D90 and have never even switched video on and wouldn't even know how to, then it's wasted on me. So why would I want to pay the video premium. I occasionally use my Coolpix for that.
My suggestion to Nikon would be this. Concentrate on the a dSLR camera, not the dSLR + Video. Yes, enhance the D700 if you can (Expeed II and the ISO of the D3s etc). For me, please make a camera I can take great images with, but it will have to go some to beat the D700.