Just look at the number of speculative in the air on D300S, D400, D3000, D4000 and you know its getting a bit out of hand! Perhaps, its seriously time to reconsider a second body after all. Usually, we have two choices. A second body that would subsume the role of the primary machine or one that is a backup.
Now, if the highly anticipated D300s comes with a similar HD video capability (like in Nikon D90) on a 12.3MP platter, it will placed itself in a no-mans land for Nikon D90 owners - as it does almost the same thing! I wouldn't want to pay extra dollar for the same HD video or identical resolving power again. That implies that the venerable Nikon D300 may just well be a better choice as a second body.
Now, however, if the upcoming D3000/4000 provides an identical 12.3MP sensor and AF engine, I don't really mind getting it as a secondary body. I no longer need those videos, remote wireless commander, battery grip compatibility etc. found on my Nikon D90.
What's your take?