Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
Aussie:
If I go DX, that's exactly the lineup I have in mind. My problem is I have not excluded an FX body from my choices. The Nikon choices are nowhere near as clear (or cheap). Canon choices are both.
I know this is both a DX discussion and a Nikon niche, so I'll keep this brief.
My dilemma since September has been to select between DX and FX, and with either, which camera or maker. If I go DX, my present opinion is D90, hands down winner, with the lenses you've discussed.
Nikon's hand is extremely weak in FX choice department. Even if the D3X makes my coffee in the morning, I am <not> spending $8,000. That leaves me with the D700, a pretty respectable choice. Still, lens choices are extremely expensive, and Nikon has all but abandoned the mid-range FX zoom for walk-around land use.
As a 35+ year Nikon owner, I am looking for every reason I can find to stay with Nikon. Unfortunately, all my Nikon lenses are AI (convertible for use on a 700, but useless under water without autofocus). Without a substantial investment in lenses I can use, the siren song of the 5DII may be overwhelming. Put that together with 3 very good Canon lens choices and a package that comes in more than $1,000 less than the 700, Nikon is in trouble in this household.
The question, then, is whether to go with the D90 value package or the 5DII. Since I'm in no rush, I'm waiting for more hands on reviews of production 5DIIs to see how they compare. That will also give me time to keep saving.