I would like to see a photo...

I won't pretend that I sell images but I can say that many buyers are well-trained. Magazine photo editors, art directors for advertising agencies, wedding planners, etc.

As I said, I do not sell images but I have removed all images from my keepers folder & my Flickr account that pre-date my 5D in spite of the fact that some of these collections are from locations I may never get back to. I suspect that many of the 5D images will begin to disappear as well.

I thought your original scenario involved a choice between a 40D and 5Dx. There are about a billion scenarios where selling work done on a 40D is perfectly acceptable especially if the customer has a chance to view the work beforehand. By the way, you'll have to go a smaller than 12x18 before I can't tell.

Let me answer this as a buyer. Let's say I'm an untrained, non-photographer person hiring a wedding photographer. Unbeknownst to me, the wedding photog does most of his/her work with a 5D3 and has a 40D as a backup. The photog's portfolio is all 5D3. I hire him/her based on his portfolio. Two days before the wedding, he drops his 5D3 and that camera is completely dead. What's the ethical dilemma here? Rent a 5D3 or use the 40D to save rental fees and overnight shipping? If the Photog decides on using the 40D, does he/she tell me and what does he/she say about the 40D o convince me I won't be able to tell the difference?

If he uses the 40D without my knowledge and I view the photographs and find them acceptable at the moment of delivery, does that let the photog off the ethical hook? There's always the possibility in the future that me and my bride become more attuned to image IQ or even more embarassing, a knowledgeable friend points out the noise or lack of resolution/detail in the photos. Either way, the photos that were supposed to be a life long treasure quickly become a source of some level of irritation. It also has the potential of damaging the Photog's reputation or source of referrals.

We all expect images to degrade over time, and in the case of digital, by virtue of advances in technology and imaging. At some point in the future, the industry may arrive at a point of diminishing return so small as to be indistinguiishable from the previous generation. We ain't there yet IMO. Who knows. Medium Format may some day open up to the masses and then here we go again with a whole new multi-generation evolution of that format (with folks griping that the 100 MP Phase One can't crank out photos at 6 fps). With the public viewing HD TV and Blue Ray movies these days and with 4k on the way, on huge screens, still pictures better keep up.

I was going to post this next comment as a response to someone else but decided that that person is entitled to his space in the conversation with you so I'm bringing this back here, so it may seem a bit our of context. If a 40D could produce clean hi-res 22 MP images, the conversation wouldn't center on "equipment". Nobody is really talking about equipment for equipment's sake. Would you have any issue with a conversation regarding different levels of photographic skills? Same thing here except we are talking about the tools at the moment.

--
Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy.