800mm f/11 because a cellphone isn't long enough!
- May 22, 2016
No, as Sony has shown with its 50MP a1, we can have both. Hopefully, Nikon will follow soon, and Canon in the next couple of years.I’m not sure there’s really a trade-off between performance and resolution. The performance is high, the resolution is lower but that was a declarative choice by Canon since the R5 clearly shows at least 30 MP was possible at 30 fps.
Regardless, 24 MP is not enough for you. What did you do before there were 24 MP cameras?
As for your second question, it's hard to remember. I've had at least 36MP since 2012 in the Nikon D800 cameras. Before that 21MP (Canon 5DII) was my body, but I wasn't doing birding then. I didn't really get serious about birding until I started working with the 42MP Sony a7r III and 45.7MP D850.
Did Photographers take incredible wildlife images with 20MP-and-less cameras? Absolutely, and I admire their work. Perhaps I could have become skilled enough to produce similar results without high-resolution cameras, but given the choice, I'd rather stick with the high-resolution cameras. And since they exist--and soon (hopefully), all three of the big camera producers will have high-resolution bodies with BSI stacked sensors--it's good to know that I don't have to choose between resolution and the best performance.