I think the worst thing about digital (and it's a long list) is digital is the age of sharpness and pixel examining, not this forum but everywhere.
Right after the attack in Paris I helped a photojournalist friend cover a rally in our city for the victims. I used my D200 as well, but at times it got really dark because street lights are barely designed to do their job let alone be good lights for pictures, and in some the poor old camera couldn't be up to par with the D700 or D7000 in shadow noise.
So I got some flack for it because the pictures weren't pixel perfect, and I just couldn't care. I was taking pictures in the cold, trying to move through the mob and the other photographers, sweating and carrying all my gear. The subjects weren't that great, plenty of local politicians that wanted to join in and get pics with a group of Muslim immigrants to show that they were totally not xenophobes (hint: they are). And to top this all off, my D7000 had major issues focusing under those stupid sodium lights that have never been replaced since before I was born or something like that, so I was pretty much forced to use the older camera with the better AF.
And yeah, I understand that the D200 loses a bit at ISO 1600, but frankly for pictures that have to be resized to 600x400 and uploaded to the web, it was plenty good. But no, they had to be pixel perfect like shooting in the studio. I couldn't even use a flash most of the time because I had to take shots of the people holding candles as well.
Were people this anal when the D1 was the state of the art?