Tom R
Established
@Bill...
My suspicion is that the focus went from the subject to the camera well before digital, when autofocus and autoexposure became widespread. We then got the idea that you had to divide your attention between the machine and the subject - after all, we need to know what the camera is doing since it's constantly changing focus, aperture and/or shutter speed to match the conditions preciseness.
But as those who use manual cameras know well, under typical shooting conditions, things simply aren't changing that fast - if the weather's unchanging, leaving your exposure alone is often the better decision, in contrast to the automated camera that changes constantly as it's pointed at lighter and darker parts of the scene. And the same for focus: a moving subject does not necessarily mean refocusing the lens - regardless of the autofocus camera's constant lens movement as it tracks with millimetre precision, heedless that it's unreasonable for the situation.
As you say, digital cameras complicate what is essentially a simply device with further distractions, further things that the makers and magazines and bloggers convince you to know and check to take a good picture. Often, digital cameras with their complexity make taking photos appear far, far more difficult than it ought to be...
I've an MA photography, yet sometimes appear foolish to friends: they hand me their compact camera, and I fumble and fail to operate it - baffled by their complexity - because I use all cameras in manual mode!
Here, here! And, by the time I wade through the endless array of options provided by most digital cameras either the moment's passed or something else changes that results in recomposing or walking away in frustration.