Two things: There is clearly no clear distinction between an amateur and a pro that one cannot nitpick about. The most obvious distinction is based on earning a reasonable part of one's income from photography, the key and controversial word being "reasonable". The pro/amateur camera distinction is more interesting , however, since it's based on the amateur having less demanding needs and using the camera less, both of which may be untrue. A "pro" camera is often called such because of the number of features, the quality of those features, and durability. Since there is obviously no "photographic Rubicon" to cross here, a camera becomes "pro" through a sufficient accumulation of enough of these. The real argument for most people is how much of any of these need to be present in the camera they want, and how much they are willing to pay for that combo.
The second thing is way OT. I do notice that Email contains more word substitution than normal text, like "metal" for "mettle". I suspect the spell checkers contribute to this more than we know, since we often make mistakes with the spell checker and send it off quickly.
