I honestly wouldn't recommend trying to stay ahead of the game in the digital SLR camera wars.
I agree but Im in the market for a new camera and don't need it immediately so I'm waiting to see what the next model has to offer which only makes sense.
Just buy that you like and don't think about it losing value or becoming replaced by the next model
I never consider that. I'm using a 10 year old Nikon D100 and a 5 year old D300.
people filling up landfills with truckloads of obsolete electronics items that are, at most, two years old and perfectly functional?)
Again, still using a 10 year old camera which will be passed on to my sister and the D300 still has plenty of years left in it for me as a backup camera.
Despite what the camera companies try to claim, the camera means nothing in terms of taking a quality photo anyway.
Wow! That could not be further from the truth when it comes to digital. As far as film cameras go you are 100% correct with the exception of shooting film with a crappy lens instead of a good one. When it comes to digital cameras, the single most important part of a digital camera besides the lens is it's image sensor. They have progressed so much in the last 10 years although that progression is slowing down. If I compare my 10 year old D100 to my D300, in low light there is a big difference between the two besides some added clarity in normal light. The image sensor in the older model had way more grain in lower light and at the higher ISO's it was nearly unusable at longer shutter speeds
A camera is just a tool, nothing more and nothing less.
That's debatable. You have to have the right tool for the job. If I have someone asking me to shoot video at 30 fps and I buy the D7000 today, I'd have to turn the person down. That model only shoots 24 frames per second. If I wait for the new model, it's said to do 24 & 30 fps.
Same holds true for low light photography. If someone needs a quality shot in low light without a flash and you have the choice of an inexpensive or older noisy image sensor or one that's newer with less noise, if it's in your budget, you have to go with the one with less noise.
Good photography skills however, are irreplaceable and priceless.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I'll stick to my trusty Nikon F-100 and steer completely clear of the digital camera wars. Camera companies despise loyalists like me that keep the same gear, year after year!
Film is still the best format due to the latitude that you have in low light situations. I'd never tell you that's it's time that you switch to digital if you are happy with that. Digital image sensors have advanced to the point that they now rival film quality and they will only improve upon that. With that being said for the limited difference and in some cases better quality of a professional or prosumer model DSLR the workflow from start to finish cannot be compared between the two formats even if you develop your own film. The fact that the newer DSLR's can shoot video and stills in the same device is an added benefit if you do both.
We all have our own application for a camera and I didn't want you to discourage someone that may be considering going digital for the first time or buying a new digital camera. There is a lot to be considered aside from price. Your opinion would require only one model camera hanging on a hook in the store. From a film standpoint, that's almost do-able but the digital world is different and I agree that you don't need to upgrade every time a new model comes out but when you are ready to buy you want to make sure that you are getting the most for your money.
Now let's get back on topic.