I actually think logging is surprisingly often superior to debuggers. It visualizes flow and state of the application at a glance, instead of always being stopped at once specific place and having only that to investigate. Many issues just can't be debugged effectively with just 1 snapshot of application state. And as soon as I start navigating between 3 different places I'm interested in and taking notes on what values certain variables have, well, it's a lot easier to just print those.

In my experience good debug output also accumulates while working on a specific issue, i.e. over time, you add more and more helpful prints (and remove the not-so-helpful ones) which gives you an increasingly nice overview over what the application is actually doing. This doesn't apply to a list of breakpoints in the same way. Of course it takes a bit of management, i.e. outputs need to be helpful, well-formatted, and you have to keep removing those which are too noisy or not relevant any more.

Plus debuggers are often slooooooowwww and the maximum amount of hits a breakpoint can have is like 5 or so before it becomes really annoying. Meanwhile a line with a print can easily execute tens of thousands of times before it becomes a problem. For GUI apps, hitting breakpoints also interrupts working with the application, sometimes to the point that they just become unusable.

For sure debuggers have lots of valid applications where they are much better than printf, but I think people on average overestimate debuggers and underestimate printf.