The 105mm 2.8G VR. AND the 70-200VR II are both superb lenes and you should at least get one of them, unless you are doing marco work, I don't think you need both

What is wrong with the 24-70mm 2.8G as a walk round lens ? if you want something light weigh, get a something like the Fuji X-Pro1, the P7100 or keep the D7000

I'm in shape position that you are. I'm keeping my 70-300 for now. The other lens I have are: 50/1.8d; 85/1.8d; Tokina 28-70/2.6-2.8

Yes, the 35/2 and ANY 50mm/1.8 will be just fine. These are sharp, great budget lenses. You can't go wrong. 85mm lens have great sharpness for portraits, but FL not that useful on other subjects. The 70-200 is wonderful, and very expensive. Any way, it's perfect as well. I've heard the 70-300VR holds it own up to 200mm. IQ decreases rapidly from there to 300mm. Tripods will always increase chance of getting shot. There's some great zooms without VR. Like the sharp, sharp 80-200/2.8 AF-S. Good luck

I guess I should also point out that more than anything I want to make use of the full resolution this camera has to offer. If a 50mm 1.8g or 35 f/2D doesn't cut it, let me know.

I just ordered myself a D800 with a 24-70mm 2.8G today and they will be arriving on Tuesday. Right now I have a D7000 with a Tokina 11-16, Nikkor 35 1.8G, Sigma 17-50, and Nikkor 70-300 VR. I plan on selling everything except the 70-300. Then I would buy either an 85 1.8G or 105mm 2.8G VR. However, I am questioning whether I should sell the 70-300 as well and just get a 70-200VR II. What do you guys think? Is it would the extra cost? Also, I would like a light weight walk-around lens and I am considering the 50 1.8G or the 35 F/2D. Any suggestions there?

P.S. I purchased the both the camera and lens from PCNation. They still had a few left in stock as of 2pm EST!