Fair enough. That could be another thread: "What were you shooting with in 1956 (or 1959)?" Of course, you'd probably have to be at least 75 or so to participate...
Sure. But (for example) I was mostly shooting M-series Leicas in 2008, the year of the financial meltdown, with the addition by last year (Brexit, Trumpism) of far more Nikon than I'd have thought likely until the Df came out. All I'm saying is that if you subtract the hysteria, 2001 may not be all that important in the long run. Especially not to non-Americans. After all, just after I left university, one of the pubs I used to drink in was blown up by the (mostly American-funded) IRA. At the time I was using screw-mount Leicas and had just bought my first 5x4 inch camera, a Dawes.
All I'm suggesting is that it is possible, especially if you are fairly young, to overestimate the importance of local events that happened in your lifetime. In 2001 I'd have been using mostly M-series Leicas but really, there are dates that are more important to me. And to most non-Americans. Frances and I were still much concerned with her recovery from breast cancer and with a prospective move to France.
For that matter, I'd suggest that anyone who can remember what equipment they were using at a particular time is more likely to remember it from a personal viewpoint rather than from the national news. More "It was 2001 so it must have been..." than "Gosh, in 2001 it was..."
For me, photographically, 2001 was much like the previous decade and the following 5 or more years. By all means tie it to 2001 -- a good idea -- but don't imagine that 2001 was necessarily very different from 1998 or 2004.
Cheers,
R;.
