Upload & Sell: On
Douglas, I can understand your point, why is so difficult to understand mine?
Of course I know the advantage of oversampling because of my job background, but for someone no need for dealing with tens of Meg pixel everyday even for my Family diary type of shots, what exact 36M downsampled file advantage to my D700's ISO200 shot? There is simply no noise in D700's file at ISO200, period. What this 1/sq(1.7) noise performance improvement give me?
If I have to zoom 50% and edit that way 98% of my images, then why I can't have a Camera with 16M clean pixel at first place? Why I need pay for all those grand total 50M at all? dealing with slow down everything, backup tons of images, for me might be OK, how about professional shooting 3000 images a day....?
Why can't they bring a D800S with 16-20M pixel, price it at $2500 and just sell it like hot cake? (well, maybe, I don't know.) There is high percentage of Nikon fans forced to pay more than they need for pixel...(as pixel count increase, yield exponentially decrease, price up)
They are going down hill in terms of build. Nikon D700 is like Digital F6 and you could live with it forever... (though I dream D700s/D800s...)
Derek, I agree with you, as a tool, there are many more important factor than pixel... and The reason I love D700 so much is exact that, especially after use some recent introduced FF DSLR.
As for M9, it is hard to qualify 'that' bad, but you never know what exact time shutter happened after you push it.....Not everyone have the same feeling, but for me, It is an issue, not big, not small, but it is there.