I'm considing one of these bodies and looking for some opinions. I'm quite familiar with Nikon bodies having owned a D1H, D1X, D70, D2H, and now a D200, but have never used a D2Hs. I'm not familar with the 1d Mk II (or any other Canon body), other than doing a lot of reading. My specific purpose is capturing available light action photography of my kids and events. I tend to prefer a more photojournalist style, than formals. My main issues with my D200 has been its AF tracking abilities and noise levels at high iso. Don't get me wrong, its AF abilities are nice, but I really appreciated the faster AF and multi-cam 2000 when I had the D2H. I'm thinking the reputation of the D2Hs' high ISO and faster AF capabilities would be the best I do could given my budget. That got me thinking, for about the same money as a used D2Hs, I could get into a used Canon 1D MK II. It seems like the supply of used 1d mk II is up since many Canon user's are parting with their mk II's in favor of the mk III. At a high level, I'm thinking the 1d MK II offers more resolution (at 8mp), which would be nicer for cropping. The 45 AF sensors and additional cross-type sensors would allow for better AF tracking (than the D200, perhaps not better than D2Hs). From my understanding, the 1D mk II has good noise characteristics at high ISO. It matches the fps rate of the D2Hs. I have a ton of Nikon glass (17-55DX, 35f2, 50f1.8, 85f1.4, 70-200VR, & Sigma 10-20), but lets ignore that for now. I may even just add the Canon to my Nikon gear, although that probably wouldn't be practical. Who knows what the D3-whatever will offer, but it will likely be out of reach from a cost perspective and I'm likely not willing to wait for it. Same with the 1D mk III. Anyone have experience with both bodies or willing to share some opinions?