How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? (AR7ii)

Maybe I'm alone on this, but I'm getting a little tired of all the recent talk of lossy compression in raw files, 'milky' shadows, etc. etc. I see people purposely underexposing images then boosting them +3EV in post and looking for problems. I see people pixel peeping at 100% or more looking for minute differences in hair strands across images from different cameras with different exposures. I see people closely examining the pixel level sharpness in the far corners of images, corners that are largely ignored by the actual viewer of an image (unless, of course, you're one of these people yourself). I have yet to do any prints on my A7Rii because I haven't had it long enough, but on-screen, and doing even casual pixel peeping, I see nothing to complain about. In fact, I'm amazed at the detail and tonality (esp. with the FE55mm on front). I've gone through the high contrast night shots I've taken previously, looking for 'bad edges', and I don't see any problems. Maybe I'm not sophisticated enough. Quite possible. Or maybe just not obsessive enough. Granted, I don't make money off photography ... it's just a sideline. Maybe others need to worry about some newlywed noticing a ripply edge in 1 out of 100 shots of a wedding dress. I'm just happy that I get manageable 40MB files that yield images that, to these old eyes, are stunning in their clarity and colour. And I'm left to wonder just how much this teapot tempest is really about some engineers--and some of my best friends are engineers --tripping over themselves to find minute imperfections and arguing about angels on the heads of pins. There... I said it. Over and out.

Oh, one more thing ... I also wonder if you asked some of these folks to reflect on the beauty of a Halle Berry or Angelina Jolie or [insert other name here], they would immediately start commenting on the asymmetry of eyebrows, a noticeable mole, a poorly placed wisp of hair, etc... it's all about priorities, I guess.