What I want is a D700 and a 105mm macro preferably with 24-70mm F/2.8 and a couple of SB-900s. But to think of, I'm doing fine with the gear I already have and I do not need any of those, unless I do real professional photography - which I don't.
I shot the above picture using the 18-200 VR on my D80; and I think it's a pretty decent macro regardless. So is the one below:
And for portraits; the 50mm f/1.8 has been producing decent enough shots.
And even the 18-200mm is not that bad:
Landscapes? 18-200mm again is enough.
I have a SB-600, which is enough to be creative with light and to light up things...
Of cause 70-300mm VR is hardly a tele, but again; for my occasional wildlife photography and outdoor portraits, it's enough.
So; what would I buy? I think nothing. May be another SB-600 if it really gets itching. But most probably nothing.
If I didn't had any of these; I would have probably bought a D700 or a D3s with 24-70mm f/2.8 and probably a 105mm macro.. I doubt if I would buy a tele and if I would, it would still be the small and light weight 70-300 VR which I already have. Not a super expensive super fast and super heavy pro lens. I'd also throw in a couple of SB-900s in to that list with a decent manfrotto tripod and a ball head.
If I was on a budget; which I probably would be, I'd settle for a D90 and a 18-200 VR together with a SB-600 and a cheap $30 tripod from Walmart. That is more than enough for some serious hobbyist photography.