If many here want 36 megapixel, why D800, D810, A7r are not big sales successes?
I imagine the d800/d810 *are* a big success, so much that people wishing for more resolution and dynamic range have dumped Canon for good and thus don't show up over here anymore. Those who could wait for 3+ years for more resolution are either die-hard Canon fanbois or don't really "need" it.
+1 I've had my d800s since they first shipped, thoroughly pleased with them. And I will happily continue shooting with them for years to come, they provide perfectly suitable performance for my large format output. But I didn't originally get them to get more MP, I got them to get better
pixels. I was grossly disappointed with noisy raw files since I got a 7D and 5D2.
I think there is an optimal number of megapixels. I think that is between 25 and 30.
It is not the number of megapixels, but the quality of each pixel.
Once I started printing images larger, it wasn't so much the lack of pixels, it was the noisy raw files that were limiting.
I can mangle my ABC camera's raw files much more than I could when I shot Canon, that gives me a lot more artistic latitude without having to be a photoshop pro.
I shoot a D800 and was very skeptical about "needing" 36mp at first, but I think it's a lot like cars - if you drive a Civic you probably can't, or don't want to, imagine needing 400hp, but after you drive a faster car for a few years, you find it hard to imagine getting around without that extra "emergency" horsepower. Likewise, those 36mp that seemed excessive to me at first, have saved more than a few shots for me with the ability to crop heavily yet retain a printable image. That and the detail in landscapes I've printed as large 30" x 40" is absolutely amazing. I would never go back to a lower mp primary camera.
I will say that file size is an issue even at 36mp, even with lossless compressed. Hard drives may be cheap, but if you're shooting at these mp, plan on buying a few of them. And multi-image Photoshop composites? Get used to .PSB files.
I think 36mp is enough, but would not turn down 50mp, and I'm sure it's coming to Nikon as well as to Canon, but I'm not sure I would see much improvement at my largest print size, or crop requirements. It would have to come with other performance improvements, notably FPS, DR and high ISO IQ before I would upgrade.
Yup, I'm very happy having more MP than I ever had with Canon gear. AND, they are BETTER quality pixels than I had with Canon within the ISO ranges I need to work, and that's up to 3200 w no problem with the best and biggest improvements at base and low ISO where I do most of my shooting.
if canon puts out a new body, with more MP, and hopefully better raw file noise characteristics than they've had since they came out with Digic 4 and newer, then maybe some die-hard canon fans will discover what they've missed out on for the past few years. But that's only if you're pixel peeping, AKA, printing large.