Anyone considered a move to mirrorless only?

I am in the same boat, albit with a D2x. I have been waiting for a D400 for sometime now, primarily to get better low light performance (i.e. better than ISO 400 on my D2x). It seems that Nikon's solution is for me to buy either a D600 or D800 which in itself wouldnt break my check book, but then I would need to invest in  14-24 and 24-70 f2.8 zooms to keep the same capablility as I now have with my D2x and current DX zooms in that equivalent range. All of sudden I am looking at something like $7000 to make the jump to FX, and I am still hauling around a whole bunch of weight.

About 1 1/2 years ago I bought an X100 to provide some low light capability. Even though it is a fixed 35mm equivalent lens, I find that I am using it more and more these days. I am giving Nikon until this fall to come up with a D400, if they dont then I will be looking at buying an XE-1, and three zoom setup, which will be less costly than a D800. Oh, something to look out for is that the new X100s has a lot of niffty new features that solve a lot of quirk complaints, that would be an easy running change to put into both the X-Pro1 or X-E1 i.e. "s" versions as well.

The other thought rattling around my feeble old brain is that since both Canon and Nikon are holding off on a pro level DX body that they might be working on an all singing and dancing pro mirrorless camera that uses say a 24 mpx DX sensor that has a 51 point PDAF sensor array built into the main sensor with a standard F lens mount... hey, if I am going to dream, why not go big? eh?

--
Conrad --------------------------------------------------- Show Low, Arizona