Well Jay,
That was a boring rant, did you get to spew enough cliches?
You seem a bit confused.
Where have I said much about any studio shots posted at DPR? I have said a few things over the years, but I don’t pay a lot of attention to studio shots.
“pixel peeping”? Hardly, and you can’t really cite an example. I do look at shadows, for noise.
Now, looking at these Sony RX100m3 studio shots (raws) I see why some think the focus is odd. Noise looks to be about like the RX10, but it’s hard to tell since only Sony’s IDC-4 extracts these raws today, June 1, ’14. (We need more raw samples and serious raw extraction software to make IQ judgments about this RX100v3.)
The problem remains that the OP equated more resolution and higher image quality and that’s a big mistake.
And yes:
it occur[s] to [me] that the end result of one[‘]s own picture taking is what really counts and determines how most of us judge image quality.
But that’s pretty obvious from my posts.
Started out doing photography at the age of 6 using an uncle's old 1940 kodak brownie box camera. At 15 years of age, I decided to buy my very own 1975 Praktica SLR camera. I now shoot with a Nikon D850. I do unpaid TFP and commercial paid work.