What makes a pro body?

I am doing such comparisons on purpose. The reason is to filter out the technological advantages which are brought fourth by progress; if there is a chance that such advantages will eventually reach saturation point. For example, would you spend $5000 on a pro body that can shoot at 2 million ISO and deliver crystal clear images if consumer model can shoot at 1 million ISO? Probably you would if there are other differences between cameras, but it would be stupid to spend $5000 to JUST go from 1 million to 2 million or even a billion usable ISO.

Good point. The easy use modes and gymmics like face detection are software features to bloat perceived value of consumer product. I agree that they have no place in a pro body. Here is another one for you: "Lytro camera" - shoot now, focus later. It's an interesting technology, eventually i guess a multi mega-pixel sensor could be built, its 1MP now. But i bet traditional sensors will always be able to pack more DR/pixels than the Lytro sensors. Lytro is a gymmic and it will be a gymmic, but eventually a 100MPx Lytro sensor with 6 stop DR will be build. So, if visible, perceived image quality from lytro sensor is not worse than a giga-pixel picture from DSLR of that time, why to use the DSLR. But there will still be a difference between pro body of year 2100 and consumer body; though i doubt giga-pixel rating of the cameras will differentiate the two.