Back in the day I was a full time sports shooter and I had the standard arsenal of 1N bodies, zooms, & super teles. Then came the divorce and all my equiptment dissapeared as did my photo career. Fast forward to 2006. I decided to start shooting again with this new thing called digital. Not having any lenses nor a large wallet, I opted for a Nikon D1h & D1x (still have the D1x), a 80-200 2.8, and a 300 2.8. Since I never used Nikon before I was interested what these "New" bodies would yield. I was impressed with the build and stills, but dissapointed in the AF tracking and the weight of the lenses. I started to really miss my 1N's & "L" glass. So, I wanted to see how well Canon progressed in the new field. I went and purchased a "state of the art" 30d and a 300 f/4. I didn't want to invest in a 1d and big glass just in case the results over the Nikons weren't any better. My testing began and I was thoroughly impressed with the performance by dismayed by the build quality. The lens of course was better both optically and in build quality, which I expected for an "L" lens. The body, however, was built like a plastic model. Sure, it looked good and functioned well, but I was afraid it would shatter if I bumped it. I will say though, that the AF tracking was spot on, the exposure was spot on, and even the built-in flash was flawless! Anyway, I sold off the pair to a friend who shoots for fun and gave the D1h to a family member. Fast forward to 2009. I'm retiring from my day job soon (no, not photography) and want to enter the sports market once again (local stuff) just to occupy my time and bring in some extra income. My Nikon D1x, although excellent for vivid stills, is not even close to doing the job. I know that my selection of "L" glass will always exceed my expectations so I will be staying with Canon and look forward to using the newer IS versions. However, I obviously want something tried and proven with stability, flexability, and dependability. I see the 1d, 1d Mk II, and 1d Mk III. I constantly read complaints about the III, a few about the II, and none about the 1d. After reviewing all the specs and features, I seem to be turning more towards the Mk II. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated! And please, no fights between you Nikon and Canon guys.