To lay my cards on the table (as an amateur), I have a digital compact and slr, both capable of excellent pictures, my phone camera too, obviously.. And a 35mm rangefinder, SLRs, 645, 6x6 folders - and I've previously owned some others including 5x4.
For me it's a little like playing piano - or how I've never stuck with the electronic keyboard (even a hammer action model). An acoustic piano embodies craftsmanship in a pleasing mechanical form, and making music is a physical process, in which you can appreciate someone's work and the natural ingredients present to arrive at a pleasing sound - quality furniture for the the senses.
Mechanical rangefinder cameras tend to embody some engineering and craftsmanship, in a pleasing form, which can yield good results when used correctly - and it helps that while disassembling a mechanical camera isn't necessarily something people can just do, we can appreciate the basics of how they work. I appreciate the process of taking pictures, not messing with switching, settings, or looking at the screen.
There are other things too.
I feel little love for SLRs generally, and tend to prefer the standard focal length mostly. My Canon 7 provides a reliable, repairable, and fairly flexible package for not a lot of money, and occasionally I bother to make a print the analogue way.
Admittedly I mostly prefer MF negatives, and actually particularly dislike the Canon 7 focussing (especially compared to a Contax II which is much quicker/better for action).
Besides, digital doesn't work in a practical sense for rangefinders - affordable full frame or go home.. to put it another way, I'm not holding my breath for an affordable digital Contax/ Kiev adaptation which retains the controls.. There's simply nothing to compete with an old film rangefinder for the price (excludes Leica), longevity, and feel.
Those digitals I do have are mostly used begrudgingly, except for my phone due to its convenience.
