Canon R3

[neuroanatomist]

I get that it is awesome to have more resolution, but what people do with the images? Do they print huge? Do they admire their images primarily on their monitor and zoomed in substantially?

I think very few photographers actually need 50 MP. Some people simply want the most because they equate the most with the best. Even billboards can be printed at high quality with 20 MP or less.

Having more MP does make sense in a couple of cases. For those who are reach limited, more MP allows a deeper crop. Often, the reason for the reach limitation is budget – few can afford the great white lenses. I feel that Canon has tried to address that with lenses like the 800/11 and 600/11, both of which take extenders. At the other end of the distance scale, macro photographers looking to put more pixels on target can benefit.

Those cases aside, I think most people who want more pixels don’t actually need them, if they’re honest with themselves.

[Fast Glass]

I think the correct argument is someone doesn't care about small differences in detail from resolution. Not that it doesn't matter.

[neuroanatomist]

Warning: humor intended. Read at your own risk. You have been warned.

Another reason is 8k displays are gonna be more common in the future and it be future proofing your images or vids.

Yes, I should probably delete all the images of my first child taken with a 4 MP camera and the standard definition videos of her birth and first steps because they just weren’t future proof. All your 1Ds III shots must also be deleted as well, of course. 21 MP is just too low. In fact, that’s true of 50 MP as well. The Phase One XF IQ4 has a 150 MP sensor, but if we’re all being honest here the only real possible option for anyone who cares about image detail and future proofing is the Hasselblad H6D-400C Multi-Shot that can produce composited images at 400 MP. Don’t settle for less, anything else is a compromise.

Egad, I just had a horrible thought. When 3D images become the norm, all of this 2D crap will need to be deleted, too…even the 400 MP stuff.

But you know, we watched an old Christmas movie on DVD last week…gasp, yes – DVD. Pathetically low 480i resolution source played back on a 4K TV. Astoundingly, we managed to suffer through it without anyone complaining about the abysmal quality. So perhaps there’s at least a shred of hope for all of us poor, blighted souls who aren’t shooting at 400 MP.

/sarcastic rant

[Fast Glass]

Warning: humor intended. Read at your own risk. You have been warned.


Yes, I should probably delete all the images of my first child taken with a 4 MP camera and the standard definition videos of her birth and first steps because they just weren’t future proof. All your 1Ds III shots must also be deleted as well, of course. 21 MP is just too low. In fact, that’s true of 50 MP as well. The Phase One XF IQ4 has a 150 MP sensor, but if we’re all being honest here the only real possible option for anyone who cares about image detail and future proofing is the Hasselblad H6D-400C Multi-Shot that can produce composited images at 400 MP. Don’t settle for less, anything else is a compromise.

Egad, I just had a horrible thought. When 3D images become the norm, all of this 2D crap will need to be deleted, too…even the 400 MP stuff.

But you know, we watched an old Christmas movie on DVD last week…gasp, yes – DVD. Pathetically low 480i resolution source played back on a 4K TV. Astoundingly, we managed to suffer through it without anyone complaining about the abysmal quality. So perhaps there’s at least a shred of hope for all of us poor, blighted souls who aren’t shooting at 400 MP.

/sarcastic rant

Really? Seriously, this is beyond uncalled for.

You have have been taking out of context everything I say, I feel like I'm arguing with a troll at this point with a serious ego.

I don't even know what to say except you need to mellow out. You have taken this way past what was ever meant to be. Your opinion is the only right one and you are just bent are starting an argument at this point. You might call it a sarcastic rant, it's just being argumentative.

To respond at your seriously narrowminded post. Yes, there is a thing called future proofing. In this case trying to take images that can take advantage of 8K monitors in the future. Just because you don't care to do so doesn't make it wrong.

This extends in many ways to imaging and technology.