Throughout the course of my DB testing process I've run hundreds of Leaf files through
ACR and,more recently,v10 from Leaf and to be honest the degree of difference is,to
my eye very slight.
In response to a series of questions I posed to Yair,from Leaf UK he went beyond the call
of duty with his answers and went out and shot a series of images that pertained specifically
to my questions and shipped me a DVD of all RAWs.
My two main concerns were 1)was the new breed of 35-39Mp sensors 'lens limited' when
the intended useage was for landscape work where 'anal' detail was required and 2) was
the Aptus 75 prone to noise issues with exposures in excess of 8 seconds [the pivot point
where I had experienced concerns with previous Valeo22 and Aptus22 tests]
Yair shot with a Mamiya 645 and samples were taken using 35mm and 80mm lenses.
Suffice to say fine detail in landscape images was stunning and exceeded expectations
Other than offering perspective/shift options i don't see where a digital HR lens would offer
improvements in fine detail resolving but I await evidence to show otherwise.
I was also supplied test images of urban evening scenes where exposures ranged from
eight to 20 seconds and can say that noise issues that have previously been a dealbreaker
for me were vastly improved.
There is still a little room for improvement,I feel,and Phase is likely still a little ahead on this
detail but one would has to be viewing onscreen at 100/200% to make the distinction.
On the topic of 'lens limited' sensors I have a brief opportunity,yesterday,to use a P45
with my Contax 645 lens lineup that ranged from 35mm to apo 350.
Overall,initial results were painfully sharp and detailed (even the 210 which has taken some hits
lately) and again if there is room for improvement with digital HR lenses they they truly
must be spectacular.
Color cast was,for all intents and purposes, surprisingly absent even with the 35mm and 45mm
lenses and,oddly,only appeared in the few test frames with the Apo 350.