Upload & Sell: Off
If the Canon update to their 7D comes out before a Nikon "d400", I could well switch.
Kent in SD
Oh jeez....why do people make comments like this? It's just hyperbole and attention grabbing.......who cares if you are going to switch?
No, quite wrong. I've become increasingly unhappy with Nikon USA's policies in particular lately (e.g. having to send camera in for very expensive repairs for minor issues.) Nikon's customer service seems to be on a sucky trend for at least the past two years. I'm unhappy with Nikon's not updating lenses I use or would use if they did what I want--e.g. an 80-400mm with AFS focus or a 300m f4 with VR. Nikon just hasn't been delivering cameras & lenses I want. I had to buy a tokina to get a good ultra wide f2.8. The one thing Nkon got right was the SB-900 flash, and their iTTL metering. However, I mostly shoot big flash set ups (10,000ws power) in manual mode anyway. I select camera gear based on how it will work for what I do, not what it says on the label. This is something I've been thinking about for the past year. If I do buy another Nikon, I just might buy it from Winnipeg, Canada. Screw Nikon USA.
I'm assuming an updated Canon 7D (if it appears) will have better AF than a d7000. The Nikon remote control is pretty wimpy and doesn't have any range to it. I can set my D300 on the other side of a canyon or valley with a CyberSync trigger on it, and when I fire my D5100 with CyberSync transmitter, the D300 will immediately fire from up to 200 yards away. This is one reason I have kept the D300. Cameras such as the D7000 & D600 are OK for weekend shooters, but when you start to do some "fancy" stuff they just weren't designed for it. And yes, for some things (such as wildlife and shooting at night) a "D400" would perform just as well as a D4 and likely outperform the slower D800. When you're shooting at ISO 800, no one will tell the difference and the camera should be half to one fourth the cost for the same performance.
Kent in SD