58 
Speaking on the issue of its new high-end Nikon D4 DSLR and the fact it has a relatively modest 16MP sensor at a time when rivals are pumping out 18 and even 24MP units, Nikon Europe’s Lars Pettersson said that 16MP is actually all you should ever need.
“Sixteen million pixels is enough for most users and for some it is even more than enough” was the quote from Pettersson. Because, as we know from the mantra that’s often repeated when talking about pixel counts, it is, of course, (all together now) all about the quality of the sensor.
The D4′s a full-frame model, as you’d expect for its £4800 price tag, with Nikon’s FX-format CMOS sensor and its impressive ISO performance and claimed improved dynamic range the key to decent photos regardless of pixel counts. [Techradar]
“Sixteen million pixels is enough for most users” – Surely “most users” won’t be spending ~£5,000 on a camera?
Having said that, I’m inclined to agree with him that we don’t need more than 16MP /right now/. But never say never – especially with some enormously high pixel density screens coming out at CES this year!
The only time that megapixel count is important (I use that word hesitantly) is when you’re not clever enough to bring a long enough lens and you end up cropping the shit out of your picture. Even then it’s not essential.
Also, assuming 300dpi 16MP is pretty close to 35mm film when it comes to printing, could be a reason why they’ve stopped there for now. (http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php)