I'm in serious need of a full-frame body and the D700 is the logical choice. My only concern is whether or not a "D700x" or something like that is on the horizon? There are always rumors obviously, but when can we reasonably expect a successor/replacement to come out from Nikon? I know there are a few hardware junkies around here so someone must know something!

Nobody here has insider info that wouldn't already be posted somewhere else like NikonRumors.com. You should check there for the latest rumors... Here's the direct link to their D700x related posts:

http://nikonrumors.com/category/nikon-d700x

I follow nikonrumors and they keep talking about a D700x coming, and soon.

SERIOUS need of a full frame? Hm if you say so.

The D700 has the D3's sensor. And the D700x will have the D3X's sensor.

So if you need high ISO, I'd probably buy now for the D700. If you need lots of pixels, I'd wait for the D700x.

http://nikonrumors.com/prices - there's NR's buying guide. It says wait on the D700.

High ISO is my goal here.

How about a fast lens?

My lenses are fast, but shooting in near pitch-black reception halls requires a high ISO body as well, hence my original statement that I'm in "need" of a good body.

i kinda doubt the d700x or watever it'll be called will have the d3x sensor, since it will cut the sales dramatically on their flag ship. d700 vs d3 is another story, its entry ff vs #2 ff in the line up. i think the d700x/s will be similar to a d300 to d300s upgrade.

either way, I'd wait.

Everything on nikonrumors.com is pointing toward a camera named "D700x." I'm pretty sure everyone assumes it's the D3x sensor, and I do, too. But moonman has a point about the whole reason of having the D3x being $8k is because of the resolution.

Just get D700.

If the noise is important to you, then just get the D700. The D3x sensor will deliver the resolution, but not the noise performance. Or if you need both, jump ship and go Canon. 5DMKII is <3

Nevaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The dark side is strong peterish

also;

the Sony A900 said to the D3x...D3x...I am your father...

not to change the subject here, but what exactly is fast glass? I've heard it a lot since I got my Nikon DSLR but never looked much into it.. I know its the lense yes, but what is different and why's it better/

Fast glass is a lens with a large aperture (small f number). The glass is, obviously, not slow, or fast inherently, but 'fast' glass is so called because the wider aperture lets in more light and allows a faster shutter speed than glass with a smaller aperture, which is slow glass. The fast and slow just refers to the aperture speed that the glass enables.

Although technical sidenote, 'fast' glass also generally enables faster and more accurate autofocusing due to 1) more light reaching AF sensors 2) presence of more accurate AF sensors being used with glass of f/2.8 and faster.

Finally, because an f-stop is a ratio of focal length to aperture opening, what is considered 'fast' varies with focal length. Canon's super-super telephotos, the 800 f/5.6L and 1200 f/5.6L are 'fast' glass for their focal length, whereas at that kind of length, f/11 would be about average. Down at 200mm, f/5.6 would be slow, f/4 is normal, and f/2.8 is fast.

Equally, shorter focal lengths, like 50mm, you get fast stuff - f/1.8, f/1.4, f/1.2, and for rarer, discontinued lenses, f/1.0. Canon made a rangefinder f/0.95, and they made f/0.75 lenses for television. There were some Carl Zeiss and Rodenstock lenses floating around at f/0.65, which is obscenely fast with regards to light transmission.

Even ,I'm about to get D700 ,but waiting for D700x to be launched first .