I tested the DR of the Aptus 12 which is supposed to be close to the IQ 180 which is supposed to be close to or a bit more than the 160. It's in one of the comparison threads here that I posted in this forum a while back. I'd really like to compare the IQ 180 against the Aptus-ii 12 to see if there is any difference.
I have the luxury of having both backs (IQ180 & Aptus12), but sadly at the moment, not the time to do the tests you want. Come to Dubai and knock your socks off!
However, I have noticed some subtle differences, subjectively speaking. Note that I process all my files in C1. In general, the IQ files look a bit more contrasty in the mid tones. The Aptus has very soft quarter tones and highlights (gentler transitions) and quite open three quarter tones and deep shadows. This is using the "product" profile, which is more contrasty than their "portrait" profiles. The IQ files also seem a little more saturated at default settings.
As a matter of personal taste, I prefer the IQ files. However, my personal tastes are very far removed from the mainstream - a quick look at the construction/industrial/aviation sections of my website will show what I mean.
www.bryansiebel.com It should be said that the files from both backs are superb, recording detail simply impossible to get on film or any other digi back I've ever worked with. For me, what is important is that there is massive dynamic range, with data that is phenomenally pliable. My current 'look' relies on massive amounts of local colour and tonal adjustments and I cannot do this to a DSLR file without obvious image breakup and posterization.
Dougs and Guys comments earlier are spot-on. It's pointless hairsplitting on tonal range, colour saturation etc. In the real world, what you need is a back that records massive amounts of tonal and colour information and software (and knowledge of it) that allows you to create the look you want. Both these deliver in spades. Most times, I am having to drag my blacks in because there is so much dynamic range that the files can look flat. Even when shooting in "California light". Amazing.
Velvia was the mainstay of my work back in the bad old days of film (a four-letter word starting with "F"). I don't miss it at all.
I'm just very glad to be in a marriage where the husband owns an IQ180 and the wife an Aptus 12. Wedded bliss!!!
Let me put it this way, the images I am making today would be impossible without the backs we have access to these days. Pick whichever back you like and can afford, then put some serious effort into learning the how's and why's of the software. In the end, it's all about the pictures. "My camera is better than yours" conversations are a waste of image making time.
Cheers,
