Nikon D700 - Still Cutting the Mustard?

[beancaker]

My trusty D300 is still going strong, but high ISO performance can be a limiting factor. It seems unlikely that a D400 will ever see the light of day, I do not like the ergonomics of the D7xxx, D750 etc, and the D810 is ott for my needs (and computer would definitely struggle with the raw files).
So, what's the general opinion on a D700? MBP have second hand examples with guarantee at around £600 - worth a punt?

As for what I photograph, see www.flickr.com/photos/beancaker for examples.

Thanks in advance for opinions.

[beancaker]

Thanks Ian - given the savings gained by going for a s/h body, I would probably go for a Nikkor 24-70 2.8 for general use. They seem to hold their value so well it hardly seems worth getting the lens s/h.
The only FF lenses I have at present are a 50mm 1.8, 70-300 4.5 and a Sigma 105 2.8 macro.

[beancaker]

Thanks for the useful feedback on the D700, and the heads up regarding the 24-70 update. Just read Ken Rockwell on the 24-70, he doesn't think much of it - so that's a good enough reason to go out and buy one!

[beancaker]

Widening the topic slightly, can anyone comment on how the latest generation of crop sensors (D7200 etc) compare with previous gen full frame such as D700 in low light / high iso?

[beancaker]

Thanks for all the advice and opinions. Had a play with a D7200, D750 & D810 in local shop today which confirmed my preconceptions:

D7200 - too small - my index finger just does not fall naturally on the shutter release.
D750 - better grip, but no AF On button and I just could not live with that plastic mode dial.
D810 - perfect ergonomics, but just too many pixels!

So, s/h D700 it is.