[font color=\'#000000\']Hi All:
Gee, this is quite a thread here. I'm no expert when it comes to the more scientific stuff, but as someone who spent a day shooting with a 1Ds and has his own images of subjects he understands, I agree wholeheartedly with Michael's (and Rob's, etc.) conclusions.
I really didn't think it was possible for a mere 11MP to best 35mm chromes, but for my sort of shooting, it certainly does. I've been shooting with Provia 100F in my EOS1v for a couple of years now, and have made countless scans with both the Polaroid SS4000 and my Howtek SM4500 drum scanner. Even my best drum scans can't hold up to the 1Ds images, in spite of being substantially larger in file size. I've got the prints to prove it.
I did all my shooting in raw mode, and used a private beta of Zoombrowser to convert them to tif. I recall the moment I first laid eyes upon the converted image. It looked a bit soft, just like the images out of the D30 do, but this is a good thing, not a bad thing. You can sharpen the #### out of the images the 1Ds produces and the results are stunning. The level of detail in the image is really unbelievable.
I did hear a rumor that the Kodak 12MP body does NOT include an anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor. If true, this should sound an alarm, since you MUST prevent spatial frequencies above the limits of the sensor from being captured. Once they're in the captured image, all the post-processing in the world won't save you. I was told the anti-aliasing filter in the 1Ds cost $2000 all by itself, which is one reason the 1Ds is priced so much higher than the Kodak. Trust me, you really DO want that filter there. I was also told the rumors of an EOS-mount Kodak camera are completely unfounded.
I've got 4 1Ds bodies on order (each from a different source), so I'm hoping to get one ASAP. Once I have one, I won't be shooting any more 35mm film, I can guarantee you that.