"When I am out in the field photographing, I enter what for me is a “sacred space.” By this, I mean that I do not want to be disturbed in the field by the technology of the camera. Rather, I want to feel free, open to the moment and absorbed by the beauty of the view in front of me. It’s not about the camera, but about the moment. Given my feelings, I do not want a computer strapped to the back of my lens, with twenty-plus levels of menus, more buttons than are needed to launch a nuclear missile, and the perpetual pause to monitor that “all systems are GO!” .... Simplicity is an elegant solution and one sorely needed in digital capture. I hope that digital cameras will mature to the point wherein we no longer consider the image sensor as the primary component, but once again return the spotlight to the lens, the lens, and the lens."I have often thought about this issue. I bought the Canon 10D some time ago because of all the fancy things it could do, but I have realized over the last 2-3 years that it really is the lens that makes all the difference. For example, I used to have a crappy Canon 28-80 lens that felt like cheap plastic (bought it because of lack of money), and it certainly gave pictures that were sub-par. When I upgraded to a nice Canon 24-85 lens, the quality of my images went up tremendously. Does anyone disagree with the above linked article's conclusion?