Oh, for fuck's sake, Kichu...
Not much of a discovery, is it? Looks like someone's shooting with a cheap set of glass and says eureka! - I found the pixel pitch to be as demanding or even exceeding the one to be found in the D3X. Goddamn... And all that bitching about the camera taking a good deal of physical abuse somewhere out there on location while shooting. C'mon! Are you all guys such freaks who don't give a flying fuck if they bang the camera against a wall or drag it over the tarmac just because it's a mgnesium fucking alloy? Don't give me such ball. Obviously, it may as well happen that you inadvertently drop it or smash it with something but... let's get serious: truth being told, most of us, (if not all) handles their cams with PROPER care. We know the financial load that's been put into it and so we treat our gear properly, and even wrap the enviromentally-sealled D3-series in a Hydrophobia-like coats!
![Cheesy :D](http://www.spfl.pl/forum/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif)
I didn't see anyone I know turn their D3-series into a hammer, nor anyone throwing it carelessly around or even down on the airstrip grass for it might get some dirt on the pentaprism housing
![Cheesy :D](http://www.spfl.pl/forum/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif)
So, please, don't blow the problem of the build quality out of proportions. I see this way overblown here. Like I said, it MAY happen that it accidentally slips out of your sweaty palms during an airshow, but other that that, we're all rather tripod-shooters (landscapes, astro) or portrait/studio shooters.
And one more thing. I can't get rid of the overwhelming feeling that the person you quoted was seriously in the amateur-tech-geek kinda league. Those guys are constantly whining about how bad this or that is. They're never fond of anything. The fact that they're so much concerned about the ruggedness of their equipment, while the truth may be they've never been in a ruggedness-demanding environment, let's me conclude that they know jack-shit about what they're actually complaining about. Five or more years ago I also KNEW that a camera must by tough, solid like a rock. But... get a life, will ya? How many times would you REALLY need an all-metal sealled body that can withstand a megatone explosion? I'll tel you: presumably never. Unless you are a war correspondent put by your editor in the midst of frontline violence. All those images of American-soldiers-photographers, equipped with their F1s and F2s come to mind now, huh?
About the buffer. It's really not as big as in the D300/300s - agreed. But if you know your trade, you know what you shoot and WHEN to shoot it, you'll never get annoyed even a bit, by the D7000 buffer. Unless... obviously, unless you really have to bring 30.000 snaps from, say, Moscow MAKS, with the Su-27 thus "filmed" at 5 or 8fps from the moment it retracted the gear to the moment it set the flaps for landing. Well, congratulations on that kinda thinking.
The D7000, my friends, is more than most of you out there will EVER need to shoot good pix and shoot them well. So, instead of crying over how my D7000 looses in the fps/buffer race with the D300(s), work on your skills, on you technique, on your artistry and craftsmanship.
Regards to you all