Those lower MPs were for two things, speed of fps for sports and action and for larger pixels for low light. It is more or less assumed that the pros or serious hobbyists know enough to get closer and fill the frame to avoid so much cropping. Before I started having trouble with my knee and leg I used to work harder to get close so I had outstanding results with my 6D (FF - 20MP) and my 7DII (APS-C - 20MP). Now I have a 5DIV FF with 30MP, 80D with 24MP, 90D with 32.5MP - too sensitive to camera motion hand held since I am no longer a human tripod but off a rigid tripod and for table top macro work it is outstanding. And I still have my 7DII - that AF system and all its options is just too good to get rid of. On days when my knee and leg feel better the 7DII and 70-300L or 100-400L mk2 get used at the Riverwalk Parkway after water birds.

The rumored new R7 to replace the 7DII is supposed to have 32.5MP but a new version of the sensor and IBIS to add to the IS in the lenses so maybe it will solve the motion blur problem. Otherwise I would have told Canon to make it a 24MP camera. It is supposed to be officially announced this week so we will see. If the reviews/test show the motion blur is solved I will be saving for an R7, adapter for my EF lenses and then the RF 100-500 lens.

I've seen people here who say that you should compose your pictures properly in the first place and never use cropping for composition, and my counter to that is that I can't afford, nor do I want to carry around a 600mm lens for a shot where I can't get close. If someone wants to buy/give me a 600mm+ lens with a Nikon F mount so that I can take pictures of the squirrels and birds across the street from my house, I'll tough it out and use it. In the absence of that, I'll use what I have and crop my D850 pictures to my liking.

Up until a couple of years ago I was still very steady.
Then my diabetes started to cause fluid retention in my lower legs which if ignored resulted in blisters that when they popped could become infected so I got orders to get a lounge chair or something where I could spend at least 1/2 the day with my feet even with or above my heart. It works for the fluid and blister problems but I get very little exercise and my legs are getting weaker so no matter how steady I hold the camera my whole body sways a bit causing motion blur with high MP bodies like my 90D and even my 5DIV. High shutter speeds help but my birds are often in among leaves, in shade on lower limbs etc. so then I get a lot of noise from the high ISO to off set the high SS.

This will probably open a giant can of worms so I apologize in advance. How many MP’s are really necessary for the average non-professional person taking pictures? By “average person” I mean someone posting on the internet, looking a photos on a computer or iPad, or cell phone. Maybe blowing up to 16x20 on a rare occasion. There are some really great deals on older cameras with 16 mp as an example. They don’t have all the bells and whistles of the latest and greatest but really, does everyone need 26,30,40 even 40mp’s? Just curious what your knowledgeable folks think. I know everyone has different needs but what do you consider adequate?

This will probably open a giant can of worms so I apologize in advance. How many MP’s are really necessary for the average non-professional person taking pictures? By “average person” I mean someone posting on the internet, looking a photos on a computer or iPad, or cell phone. Maybe blowing up to 16x20 on a rare occasion. There are some really great deals on older cameras with 16 mp as an example. They don’t have all the bells and whistles of the latest and greatest but really, does everyone need 26,30,40 even 40mp’s? Just curious what your knowledgeable folks think. I know everyone has different needs but what do you consider adequate?

This will probably open a giant can of worms so I apologize in advance. How many MP’s are really necessary for the average non-professional person taking pictures? By “average person” I mean someone posting on the internet, looking a photos on a computer or iPad, or cell phone. Maybe blowing up to 16x20 on a rare occasion. There are some really great deals on older cameras with 16 mp as an example. They don’t have all the bells and whistles of the latest and greatest but really, does everyone need 26,30,40 even 40mp’s? Just curious what your knowledgeable folks think. I know everyone has different needs but what do you consider adequate?

This will probably open a giant can of worms so I apologize in advance. How many MP’s are really necessary for the average non-professional person taking pictures? By “average person” I mean someone posting on the internet, looking a photos on a computer or iPad, or cell phone. Maybe blowing up to 16x20 on a rare occasion. There are some really great deals on older cameras with 16 mp as an example. They don’t have all the bells and whistles of the latest and greatest but really, does everyone need 26,30,40 even 40mp’s? Just curious what your knowledgeable folks think. I know everyone has different needs but what do you consider adequate?