>>3720379>especially about lens design, a half size sensor needs twice the lens resolution.That’s when you try to shoehorn a niche into an are that it’s not optimised for. Maybe it’s collateral of the megapixel war, MP count being the most marketable and easily understood spec on the spec sheet.
For me it would make more sense to just accept that with APS-C you print half as big (in total are), and that’s it. Then you can get the same pixel density as, say, full frame, same ISO performance, same demands on lens sharpness (which would lead to cheaper and smaller lenses), etc etc.
If you try to cram 20+MP in APS-C all bets are off. And the cost benefit comparisons get murkier. Because you don’t get the same ISO performance as bigger sensors, but you also don’t get to print as big. Maybe that’s the reason for doing it though, it’s a marketer’s dream to have a murkier situation that doesn’t allow direct and straight comparisons.
