Complexity does not equal superiority, and the fact we have need for such things as nightvision goggles and binoculars suggests that our eyes can and will be be improved upon. Sure, some people will stick with the eyeball Mark I, but other people wont, its that simple.

But, what if it were possible for organic eyes to get this features as well.
The features are out there,,,

notice something about night vision and binoculars, they both are objects that best work on top of human eyes. The amount of nerves that pick up light cover the entire surface of the back of the eye and are each smaller than the smallest accurate light detector yet, and they even see in color. Ever wonder why film quality is better than digital quality in photos, because it captures the light as it is and you view it with your eyes. The digital camera tries to act like the eye and use sensors, but there aren't enough of them and they aren't sophisticated enough to replicate the eye in the slightest, hence why pixels keep going up in cameras, though they'll fall short until we start using living technology. Some animals are capable of binocular like vision, while other's are apt at night vision, surely the effects can be replicated without replacing the eye with some poor copy made from metal and plastic.

I dare you to say you can pick out the pixels on a digital photograph that's being held infront you. You won't of course because you cannot, so the "resolution wont be high enough" argument is baseless, especially so considering were talking about the near future here.

besides, why would they be poor copies?

The thing is, do you want a vision that's 50x better? Think about it, you'd probably go insane from all those things hitting your mind all at once, not to mention everyone would appear vastly different.

It wouldnt be a problem because there would be settings, naturally.

Given the image is of vivid enough colors or contrast, I can indeed pick out a pixel from a megapixel image and so can anybody without farsightedness given that the photo is of course scaled to 100%, and that's not even what would cover an entire person's view range. The little details that make up the world that we see are what make it appear real and alive. Reduce it to pixels and your just replacing one of the most sophisticated and well working devices on the planet with a piece of junk.

They would be poor copies because they would attempt to do what the eye does, and whatever features you may slap onto it, it's still an attempt at making a copy of an eye.

I really can't see why you'd favor microchips over nerve cells, especially when the eye can be improved genetically.

If nothing else, this is a good thing for the blind. Besides, make anything 60 million pixels and you won't notice that it isn't analog/bio viewing.

In general, yes, but when it comes to specialized jobs such as a surgeon, soldier, or pilot, then I can see one specialized eye or at least a chip implant to be very useful. That said, those jobs are all likely to be performed largely by robots (with varying stages of independence), so we're pretty incapable of predicting to what level humans will be involved.

I want night vision dammit, and i want Infra-red too. Wouldnt mind a little higher resolution and an auto dimming device. Improve process frame rate of about 90+