Originally posted by northcoastgreg Perhaps on some tech measures that's true. But why is that important? Does the best technology win? Of course not. For years Canon had sensors in their cameras that performed worse, in terms of DR at low ISOs, than what Nikon used in their cameras. Yet Canon sold more cameras than Nikon, despite "inferior" tech. Why? Because most hobbyist photographers either don't do much PP or prefer darkened shadows in their images -- so the extra DR in Nikon cameras didn't do anything for them. They just didn't care. (Note: I mention this as a photographer for whom DR is very important.) Now we're being told by review sites that burst rate and video specs are important. I've probably met close to a hundred serious photography enthusiasts over the least six or seven years. Hardly any of them are interested in video, maybe four or five at most have used their cameras in burst mode (half may not even know what burst mode is or how to find it on their cameras). A good portion of these enthusiasts are fifty an older, and there's important economic reason for this: older people have more money, more purchasing power, and so they can afford to buy all kinds of gear. But older people, especially women, are less enthusiastic about the tech side of photography.
I think you're right. I used my camera (Pentax S1a) back in the late '60's-70 as a tool to help earn my living. But since then have just been an enthusiast. My S1a was the basic 35mm, no meter, no motor drive, just the 50 mm F 2 and a hand held and cheap light meter. That was it, and it was reliable, durable, got the shot in all kinds of weather and conditions. So as a working 'pro' all I could afford and needed back then was basic, good quality 35mm SLR. I wasn't trying to get too artsy, I just needed to get a good, clear photograph in B + W, good for publication purposes.
During my working life as a non photographer, the budget wasn't there, family, food, shelter, transportation, etc...so I used mostly a Pentax K 1000 and a 35-105 A zoom. This was what I mostly used for 20 odd years.
Now I'm an old and retired, have extra cash. I've spent more on equipment, as I have more to spend on equipment. Generally I use my K1, 24-70 F 2.8 and WR 100 F 2.8 Macro lenses. Or my K5 and Sigma 150-500 and 55-300 for wildlife and far away shots.
I've got other cameras, other lenses, but these are the mainstays and I don't use, or probably know half of the technology on either the K5 or K1, but I'm satisfied + with the pix I get. I only use burst mode on the telephotos with nature shots, usually of birds flying. Get more then one chance, this way.
I also have use a Ricoh GR ll, 28mm F2.8 fixed lens. Great little camera.
I'm not interested in the latest Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. mirrorless.
Sounds like I fit the demographic.