Imagemaster wrote:
99% of the people buying cameras do not make large prints.
The 99% statement is likely true. But we could say the same thing about may features of modern cameras: 99% of people buying cameras don't need 40fps, photograph birds in flight at dusk, share images outside of social media and email, print at all, use interchangeable lenses, sell/license photographs, or many other things that are important or critical to some of us.
The idea that something is a wasted feature if only a small percentage of users "need" it leads to a place that most of us would find pretty disappointing. High-end cameras are not designed just for the theoretical "average" user — they are designed to cover the range of needs of a wide range of users.
In addition, 99% of those "people buying cameras" are not going to purchase such a high MP camera. There are plenty of other options for that "99%" from the same companies making the high-res cameras, and these range from high-end, lower-MP cameras optimized for speed right on down through all-in-one cameras built for consumer generalists.
Surely you don't propose that camera companies should only produce cameras that satisfy the needs of those in the 50th percentile of all camera buyers.
If all else is equal — and it tends to remain so as pixel density increases — there is little harm in increasing the number of MP in order to provide a capability that some of us need. If you don't want it, the solution is simple: get something else.
Imagemaster wrote:
99% of the people buying cameras do not make large prints.
The 99% statement is likely true. But we could say the same thing about may features of modern cameras: 99% of people buying cameras don't need 40fps, photograph birds in flight at dusk, share images outside of social media and email, print at all, use interchangeable lenses, sell/license photographs, or many other things that are important or critical to some of us.
The idea that something is a wasted feature if only a small percentage of users "need" it leads to a place that most of us would find pretty disappointing. High-end cameras are not designed just for the theoretical "average" user — they are designed to cover the range of needs of a wide range of users.
In addition, 99% of those "people buying cameras" are not going to purchase a high MP camera. There are plenty of other options for that "99%" from the same companies making the high-res cameras, and these range from high-end, lower-MP cameras optimized for speed right on down through all-in-one cameras built for consumer generalists.
If all else is equal — and it tends to remain so as pixel density increases — there is little harm in increasing the number of MP in order to provide a capability that some of us need. If you don't want it, the solution is simple: get something else.
Dan
Jun 25, 2022 at 01:44 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #15976552 « Will Canon come out with a R1? »
