>>4248678You're discounting the fact that outside of dog/cat snapshits and wedding/event photographers, basically nobody, and I mean fucking nobody, goes over ISO 1600. This hasn't changed in over 100 years. Good, professional photography that warrants spending $3k new/$2k used on one single fucking camera, largely stops at ISO 1600. Maybe 3200 in a low tier shoot, where something went wrong, or it's extremely casual, informal, and not paid at the full rate. At ISO 1600 so begins journalism and event photography then yknow what, you bought the wrong camera.
Remember these are ultimately professional tools. They cater to pretty well defined markets, because the markets are fucking JOB DESCRIPTIONS. [1] Art, hobby, that's not a job, and gear arguments aren't relevant, because best doesn't exist, because there is no one objective goal with a tangible result and a failure condition anymore. Those exist for jobs. A hobby or art project can call a blurry snapshit a success.
So 62mp sony sells really, really, really well. And leica sells a 62mp camera. And if canon could they would.
And 24-ish mp sells really, really, really well, because wedding photographers didn't stop making money when they realized they weren't exactly serving conde nast. They make money. They don't care if they aren't rubbing shoulders with hollywood.
And it doesn't affect you. Because photography isn't your job. You will never be shooting 80% strobes, 20% sunsets, for money. If you're just a /p/oster with your dog cat car street snapshits:
24mp is a pretty budget friendly point for all formats, and one where you can get most features people want.
42/45/50mp is the real sweet spot for overall quality but you might give up something like a fashionable form factor, a few extra bucks, or a small amount of dwindling weather resistance. Skip to [1].
