Fact is, most (many?) general lawyers handle a real estate transaction every now and so may consider themselves "experienced" lawyers even if they don't do this work day in and day out. The term can be a bit of a "red herring."
If you are confident that nothing can or will go wrong on your deal, AND you do not want to ask for advice or guidance AND you make a good selection, a good lawyer is going to be a good lawyer, regardless of his or her focus on a specialty practice area (or if she is a general practitioner).
On the other hand, if you want to have questions answered, or you want someone who is prepared to help meet unforeseen problems and contingencies, you will be better served by someone who has more familiarity and experience in the nuances of the various contracts, ordinances, customs and practices that can vary from community to community.
Going against the main stream on this, I will humbly suggest that ultimately, the level of service (the amount of attention) your lawyer will devote to your transaction should be a greater consideration than the notion of whether your lawyer does other things in addition to practicing real estate law. Sure your lawyer should have core competence, but as I stated at the outset, a great many do.
My practice is devoted (nearly exclusively) to real estate transactions. I deal with "experienced" lawyers all the time. Sadly, some are just "too busy" to answer or return phone calls or follow up on contract matters. Others farm all their work out to secretaries or paralegals and have almost no client contact at all. I'll take an attentive general attorney over an indifferent "expert" any day of the week.