I agree with Athena, particularly her allusion to the fact that it's the photographer who creates the photograph not the camera which, as a tool, simply "takes" it. That said, I do like to understand how to get the best out of any camera I'm using - film or digital.
With film (my preferred
medium), this is a relatively simple task as the "control" element is focus, compose and ensure optimum exposure for the scene you're shooting - then press the shutter. Okay, you can add use of filters and flash into the equation but I'm sure you get my drift. Which film to use is pure personal choice and down to colour or mono, grain required and latitude characteristics / ability to record shadow and highlight detail.
With digital, on the other hand, the myriad controls built into the camera to control saturation, hue, contrast, noise reduction, aspect ratio / pixel count, RAW / Tiff / JPEG, auto-bracketing / HDR and a host of other variables is enough to drive the creative juices right out of many of us. The first digital camera I owned (a Canon G5) had a user manual thicker than our local telephone directory - and most of the terminology was alien.
Okay, these days, I'm a lot more familiar with the controls but I have a craving not
to need to be so. For me, at least, my ideal digital camera would be something that looks and handles identically to a Nikon F2 or F3, has a "full frame sensor", no screen on the back to "chimp" at after every shot and offers only ISO sensitivity and the choice of JPEG or RAW. I might (grudgingly) accept auto focus for when I'm shooting sport or wildlife). Mono or colour would be my choice at PP stage, as would the introduction of any artificial grain (a la Silver Efex Pro) or other special effects.
Put simply, I only want a camera not a computer.
Tomorrow, I get my wish (to some extent) as I am off to meet some kindred spirits of mine at the extreme eastern coastal edge of Kent to give our large format / pinhole / sheet film cameras an airing......