Currently I have the Mark II and 1D, and the 70-200 2.8, 17-40 and 50 1.8. I am a freelance photographer covering mostly HS sports but also some spot and general news. I am planning on buying a 300 2.8 and making the 17-40 a 16-35, and after that I will have some $$ left for another body. Right now I am really tempted by the 1D3 - I could really use the ISO 6400 for the high school caves I shoot sports in, and the IQ and look of the files from the 1D3 are really tempting. But on the other hand, the 1D2 I have now does the job. It doesn't to it super well at 3200, but it works for the newsprint my work get published on. Either way, I would really like to get a 2nd body that can do at east 1600 comfortably, as the 1D is pushing it there.
So really the question is, is the 1D3 as "necessity" for PJ/sports work, or am I just being a gear head and desiring it when the 1D2 could do the job just fine?
Interested in hearing your opinions.
Thanks in advance!