Nikon camera without video and about lenses?

I have a Nikon D90, but want to go better, but just want good quality in the camera, not have all that video recording stuff, for i never use that. What are your opinions on Nikon's camera that don't have video on them, but are a bloody good camera, for around hmm $2.000 to $2.600. Also i would love the 600mm lens "wildlife", but the dollars they want for this lens is to steep for me, is there a lens that does a similar job, which is slightly less in cost. I have the 500mm bigma (sigma) and it's a good lens, but not that fast, so any help people would be great, cheers.

Added (1). Hi Jens, i like the D90 don't get me wrong, but i do alot of birds in flight and wildlife photography, and basically i see when you buy a camera that also has video, that is part of the cost to it. I would like to pay a similar price but just get the camera with no video in it. For i think you would get a better camera with better dials and things on it, than you would with a camera that has video. I find the video is like a waste, for i never use it. I thought i might be able to get better speed or sensors for the price than a camera with video. As for the lens, i need faster, for i get good frozen action shots, but would like to get a crisper shot. I have used AP but find using a higher ISO gives grain/noise, So i use SP, and sometimes.well alot of the time Manual. I'm interested in what more you can say, for your last comment was good, thanks.

Added (2). Oh also forgot, i would also like to get more than 4 fps

Added (3). Thanks so much for the insight, and all the help you have given to help, i appreciate it, i willawardyou full list of stars, thanks Jens.

What exactly do you find lacking about your current camera? The D90 has the same sensor as the $1500 D300s.

The Nikon full frame cameras have their uses, but unless you go for the D3x those are mostly geared towards crazy high ISO performance (D700 and D3s).Is that worth dishing out $2500 to you?

Also keep in mind that your current camera benefits of a 1.5x crop factor. You'd need a 750mm lens on a D700 or D3 to get the same reach that you currently get with your D90 with your 500mm lens.

Edit:
While i wish there were, with the budget that went into the video feature then being put to other use, the choices are limited. D300(s), D7000, D700, Canon 5Dmk2. Pentax K5. That's it. I'd advise against the full frame ones, the additional reach of crop frame will likely be more important than the high iso performance.

I guess it should come down between the D7000 and the D300s. While there's a D300 without video, there have been other substantial improvements in detail in the D300s, hence i'd prefer that one.

In short. The D7000 does a bit better in terms of high iso. The D300s has a crazy good autofocus system. For your purposes, birds in flight and such, the D300s would be my weapon of choice. 51AF points, 15 of them cross type… Fast and accurate. Also, if you happen to like the 3D tracking of the D90, imagine how that will work with 51 AF points instead of 11…

The D7000 still has 39 AF points, so that's plenty too.