I cannot understand why people try to put different camera into "Pro", "Semipro (Pro-am)" and "Amatuer". Are they based on reliability?functionality? price? sensor size? metal vs platsic body?or status?? For me they are all artificially drawn fussy grey lines.I am sure that if you pick any of the above 6 criteria, you can find a sample to reverse the role between the Pro and the amatuer. With DSLR, the electronics will fail without warning.Therefore any pro will have at least one spare body all the time. So the reliabilty will be out of the picture. The newest plastic body camera have more function than the "pro' model even from a year ago. Also the 5D II is priced around $2500. So the line for functionalty, sensor size and plastic body is really burred. Due to the relative cheap price of ALL DSLR. People can buy any model as long as they want it and can afford it. So the line for price and status also become burred. A lot od amature are using pro model for that reason. So why should we try to bin the differeent models? May be the only thing left the price and status to show off.
I find that the best way to determine if it is a pro camera is to check the 6 inches behind the viewfinder
Seriously though...there are always some people who have more camera than ability...that is true of a lot of things. Not everyone who has a Porsche really knows how to use everything on that car. For a lot it is a status symbol, you're right. But there are also some poeple who really know how to use them to their full potential.
There are still people who think that a good camera will help them take good pictures and so they buy way more gear than they need. I was a professional photographer for 5 years (by professional, I mean that is how I made all of my money), and I still take photo jobs on the side now, and one of my biggest pet peeves is when someone will say "wow, that is a great picture...you must have a good camera!" That is as insulting as telling a cook "the meal was great, you must have an awesome oven!"
Sorry, I got off on a tangent there. You are kind of right though, the line really is blurred. Two of those 5 years I was using a 20D almost exclusively...by the standard definition, not a "professional" camera (I occasionally used a 5D for family portraits for the extra resolution). A lot of pros only care about the final result and the cost...they are willing to pay for a better camera if they need it (ex: wedding photographer needing the faster AF and low light performance of a 1D series), but if they don't, they sure won't spend their money on it because they are interested in profit, not fancy cameras (that's why my boss got us 20Ds).