Would you care to share with us what facts your opinion is based on?
Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100627\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
the price was quoted to me by the rep...
my opinion about the file quality is based on owning (or having owned) a 1DsmkII, a P20 and now a P30....i looked very hard at the ZD (i shoot mamiya now with my P30, 645afdII and RZ)...looked at any raw file i could get my hands on, porcessed it in any app i could get my hands on...
my personal opinion, which is of course based on my personal needs: i shoot fashiopn and people, not landscapes, mostly studio, high/clean iso necessary (sometimes)...i have no need for ultrawides or even wideangle....
so my ranking would be from worst to best: canon, ZD, P20....and honestly the ease, handling, high iso and same file characteristics (softer=needs sharpening, poor dark shadows, transitions) pretty much placed the canon almost the same as the ZD...the ZD is better, but the margin is small where it counts for me, but the canons have a lot of advantages (even if i don't really use them: AF,...)
the P20 provides files that are plenty big for me, even cropped down (i rarely go over 11x14) a P20 file blown up with GF looks better to me then a full size ZD or canon file....
the P30 is in a different league....and with the high iso and the + version coming out....it really is the best all-around back out there....phantastic resolution, fast shooting, clean 100, even 200, great "grainy" 800 (1600 with the +)...works on my 645 and my RZ....i forgot to mention that the deal i got on it put it in the same price range as the ZD...it was a complete no-brainer for me....
that said: i really believe for a landscape shooter, 100 only the ZD is a better alternative to the DSLRs...i don't think the 1DsmkIII will really change that....unless it is 16bit and they come out with better lenses.....but i don't see that happening...at least not in that price range....