So the real issue here is whether the F100 is a "Pro" or a "Prosumer" camera in it's time? Isn't it a little bit subjective when you're talking about ANY camera? Obviously we could dismiss the Kodak "Easyshares" and such, but beyond that...? I'll bet there's many a "Pro", if they are shooting film today who thinks their FE2 or F3HP is the pinnacle of a "Pro" camera. I'm not even gonna ask what the real definition of either is, because I'm sure that would open a REAL Pandora's Box and here's the OP, just happy and telling us he got a good deal on a really nice camera.
With regard to that, thanks for sharing! It's always nice to hear about someone landing the camera they always wanted. I had an F100 too - wanted it for quite awhile and had it for quite awhile - and I still think it's probably one of the best film SLR values going, bar none. Solid, reliable, fast, looks good and technically excellent metering and AF/AE. The list could go on and on. I really can't think of anything I would have changed with that camera. If I hadn't stopped shooting chrome and gone down the Rangefinder/B&W road, I'm sure I'd still be using it today. And for whatever it's worth, I probably did "look like a pro" among the other photogs on the street or at an event with my F100 and 50/1.4 or 80-200/2.8 mounted.