Ask people like Vincent Laforet and Robert Caplin why they prefer the 5DM2 over the D3X.
Vincent was a Canon shooter to start with. And it's clear from reading his blog that he was lusting after doing some video long before we had
any DSLRs that could do so. So it seems pretty natural he'd pick up on the 5DII in a hurry. Robert, too, is a long-time Canon shooter. So, I guess that both would tend to prefer a Canon solution to a Nikon solution, with or without video.
FWIW, I, too, am dabbling with video. However, I've chosen a GH1 as my weapon of choice. I just think it does a better job of the video end than the 5DII. But who am I since I haven't posted anything on Vimeo (disclosure: I have a degree in filmmaking, have some feature film experience, a lot of documentary experience, and taught filmmaking for four years at a big university, produced and directed shows for regional PBS; no, I don't know what I'm doing).
Thanks for the response but you misunderstand where I'm coming from.
No, I think I understand it perfectly. Nikon isn't producing what you crave. So you'll just pound on them until they do. I sure hope that this isn't the way you conduct your personal relationships, too.
I think there is no logical reason for them to have not done it other than a business bottom line decision that is probably ill founded and I explained why.
I see. So Sony, Olympus, Pentax, and a host of other companies all have the same ill-founded decision, too? But basically you wanted Nikon to drop everything else and just produce the camera you want. That's what it boils down to. Never mind that their low-end cameras, which is where they make most of their money, need a bit of work. Never mind that m4/3 has exposed a weakness. Never mind that other cameras were due for updates. Just produce the one you want and they'll be making the "right" business decision.
I noticed through all your response you offered no reason why they don't yet have one,
Simple reason: they haven't gotten to that on their product development schedule. Nikon's pretty predictable. They have teams enough to do three or four cameras a year. They chose to put those teams elsewhere. And it would be difficult to dispute their logic. D3000, D5000, D300s are all bread and butter projects. D3s just makes the 1DIV look a little bit out of date and will continue Nikon's recent dominance of the FX pro camera ranks.
If you'd be willing to look at a little history, the D700 was a year after the D3. A D700x would likely be a year or more after a D3x. Why? Because you can't develop the follow-on until you've got the thing it follows locked down. If Nikon were to launch a new pro camera today, it would have
started development at least a year-and-a-half ago. At least. Yes, the D3 and D300 were done together. That was a planned effort, and it took pretty much everything Nikon had at the pro end to do it. So, D3x was a year ago (seems like longer, doesn't it?). A D700x might be expected about now, which was my original guess. The problem, though, is video. If we're to believe the rumors about the D3x sensor not being conducive to video (which I don't, by the way), a D700x would be based on something new. But even if it wasn't, the video on DSLR game has changed rapidly. 720P/24 M-JPEG is not enough. That means more work to do, and
new work, not simple modification work. And don't tell me that they could just hire more engineers or work harder or faster until you've read and understand The Mythical Man Month.
So, I've
never expected a D700x before about now, and it doesn't surprise me much that we didn't get it.
What I mean by (misguided) "greed" is that I suspect they don't offer it because it's not in their financial interest in their mind.
It might not be in their financial interest (though I don't think this is the reason why we don't have a D700x yet). Nikon has a
lot of territory to try to defend now. All the way from a lowly US$99 pocket camera to a US$7999 rivals-MF pro camera. Ultimately, they pretty much
have to back fill all the possibilities in that range. But at any given time, it's likely that they're looking at which thing brings the most return for the R&D investment. That may not be a D700x. It might be a D700s, a D90 replacement, or something else. The 5DII has gotten a lot of press, much like the 5D before it. But also like the 5D before it, it doesn't seem to be selling quite in line with all that publicity. It sells well, but apparently not as well as the lowly D700. Go figure.
So, it's possible that Nikon is looking at numbers and making a decision different than you'd want them to. Again, I don't think that's likely. I think Nikon pretty much has to do both a D700s
and something with more pixels (D700x-type). But are they here today? No. Will they be here in Q1? One of them may. When will they both be here? I think by early 2011.
--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com 
You have to post it first, THEN ask for approval. You also have to start the post with "Mother, may I . . ." I qualified two years ago - would that count? No, wait, I never e-mailed anyone a NEF!!!!! Geeezzz. This is gonna be tougher than I thought. Not only that, it's snowing in Central Arizona.