One higher MP "maybe" in Q1, that's a tepid prediction. Another in a year? Now you sound like me.
No, I said a D700s (D700 using the D3s sensor and adding video), and a D700x type product (using either the D3x sensor or a new sensor, and possibly in a different body, which is why it would be called a D800). In terms of likely development, the D700s would be second, not first. It's too close to the D3s launch to launch a D700s. Thus, I expect a D800 first, the D700s within a year.
I see your view, but... A D4 would come before a D800 if that's the lineage, and that would mean 2 years, so that's not likely. However, a new camera, not in the D3 D700 lineage, may be next, but not Q1 2010. A D700X without video, in essence cloning the D3X sensor in a D700 body seems logical and maybe soon, however, I sense Nikon is not willing to part with any sales of the D3X which a D700X would surely kill.
Many of your, and others, assumptions about Nikon's "path" and tendencies is based on a belief that because of the D3 to D700 lineage and timing and because the D700 was identical in IQ to the D3, that they will now follow suit with subsequent releases, in other words a D700X is likely next, identical in IQ to the D3X, but I don't see that as likely at all, and I think the D3s in an indication of that. What is more likely than a D700X is a D3X with 1080 video and a very high price tag, with a simultaneous, dramatic lowering of the D3X price. This is why they just stuck video in a D3, now they will stick video in a D3X, the scary part is when they made the D3s they raised the price, so $9,000 D3X with video is possible.
However, I am hopeful, in the midst of all this tweaking of existing cameras they will release a new camera, a 5DM2 competitor, around July, though my hope is slim for even that. I like 21 MP, 1080 video, high iso equal to the D3s but all of it in a smaller, less robust body with of course less fps than the D3s for around $3,500 to $4,000. Because it won't be a super action camera, the D3s sales will be protected, because it won't be the highest MP the D3X sales will be protected, and because it will be around $4,000, not $2,700 like the 5DM2, it will make Nikon feel safe and happy, and rich. I'll buy it, put a battery drive on it and it will be the camera I have been waiting for for 2 years.
Why does it matter to me? I'm probably in the minority here but here it is again so people can understand I am not bashing Nikon, I am encouraging them:
1. I shoot 95% MF Leaf, Hassy H1 with HTS 1.5, so I don't HAVE TO buy an expensive 35mm camera (the D700, although inexpensive, would be a waste of money with no video).
2. But, there is a new market opening for me that I am getting requests for all the time that make a really versatile 35mm with HD video necessary.
3. With the current economy in nyc (my situation specifically, and many others) paying $8,000 for D3X without video and then also needing to buy a D3s for video and low light ability (total $13,000+) is out of the question financially. Yes, these new opportunities need high MP, low light ability and HD video and no they don't pay enough to warrant that equipment expense, yet. Many of these job opportunities start as freebies and end up with high profile connections.
To me, this is crystal clear, Nikon does not make the camera I need to satisfy my clients or me, and the work around, buying the D3X and the D3s, is cost prohibitive. I am not speaking for anyone else when I say they should make a 5DM2 competitor but I know there are a lot of Nikon users who want what I want, especially because Canon has it now.
So, prediction: July 2010 (though I wish it was Q1 2010) a new model FX camera from Nikon with 21 MP, 1080 HD video, excellent high iso IQ, small body, battery pack available, $3,999. No D700X, no D800, if anything a D3X with video and a dramatic lowering of the price of the D3X (D3X $5,999, D3XHD $7,999).
