BC, the P30+ is not a fat pixel back, although your models are skinny.
I'm sorry.
Regards,
Ben
I think sometimes we concern ourselves more with the technical specs of a camera than we do who is viewing the image.
This article is more about motion than still photography, but has a some crossover.
I'd look at part two rather than part one as part two has more real life information.
http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/I select a camera for a lot of reasons, some not always logical, but that's a matter of opinion, not always fact.
These are "fat" pixel images these from my p21+ at 18 native mpx,
This from a 1dx 1 also at 18 native mpx.
Obviously different genres, so different cameras, but the mlx never concerned me, getting the image did.
(these are way knocked down jpegs, so they're not meant for pixel comparison but they worked, we're approved, life goes on).
Why these cameras/backs? Because the p21+ shoots at the same speed on the contax as quickly as film did, the 1dx is rugged, takes a beating and focuses very accurately.
Actually the bottom shot is done one handed while I bounced around on the back of the lead ATV at about 35 to 40mph.
Would they make a difference at 100mpx? Don't know but I'll use either of the cameras without blinking.
But I'd always test before I would rely on camera specs. My RED Ones are reported at around 12bit files and compared to a still camera advertised as 14 bit the ol' RED one has more lattitude.
But as they say horses for courses, though I say if it ain't broke, don't worry about it.
IMO
BC