I agree. One of the neat things about the move of photography to digital is that cameras quickly become obsolete. This allows those with limited budgets to acquire cameras at bargain prices that only a few years before were top-of-the-line professional equipment with prices to match. The D2X is a good example of this. I paid about $4,600 for mine new in 2005. You can find them on the used market now for about $500-600.
The thing is, a few years ago top professionals were making beautiful images with that camera, and nothing prevents you from being able to do that now! If you are a landscape shooter who is happy to shoot at ISO 100, you can do great work with a D2X. (If you are a sports shooter who has to struggle with gym lighting, not so much, which is why I have a D3.)
In the film days, the images from a 1968 SLR and the images from a 1998 SLR were indistinguishable. There were better films available in 1998, but the 1968 SLR could still use them. So while the newer cameras had additional features such as autofocus, there was no improvement in image quality, and the used market wasn't nearly as heavily discounted as is the DSLR market. That's why I say obsolescence is one of the neat things about digital. Of course, if you have a professional need or personal desire to stay on the leading edge of technology, it's not so neat. But for those who are looking for budget-priced technology, this is a golden age.