>>3085745> I love that perfectly fine lenses are now "bad" because there are now $2.5k+ bodies with sensors that outresolve them.First of all, that's apparently exactly what he wants to use. And yes, then it's rather "bad", because that high resolution sensor will do little good.
Apart from that, even on the 24MP FF cameras you'll see a difference, and it's not entirely new
Sure, the E-mount has pushed some of the primes further into "adequate for >40MP" range, but at least for the 100m macro, Canon and Zeiss and I think Nikon as well had better, more even and sharper lenses before.
Besides, most older lenses on Pentax that I had tried don't really quite match even the 100mm macro. Most lenses I remember are beaten by what Samyang now releases into the budget segment of lenses (like aforementioned MF lenses).
> What are those 36+ megapickles being used for, anyway?Fancy digital images. Large prints. Ability to crop and edit more and easier before it's below your target quality.
This and all the advantages resolution increases brought before - but mainly with good lenses.
I can understand that not everyone needs it, but even if you have a rather very common 24MP camera you might *still* see the appeal of better glass if you compare.
