I have just pointed at recent reports from people having shot both with opposite views. Reason would indicate that they are pretty close.
They are different, though as I stated some tend to illusion that their DSLR is same, it is not. A number of posters using both D800 and MFDB (not even 80MP) was interesting read and stated they do so for different reasons; http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=70759.0
In end it is mere choice, and whatever gear makes happy to make images, so who cares in end?
My offer stands to do a real world comparison. I'll be in Shanghai next week, want to do a test Tuesday 6AM on the bund?
Frankly, for one I do not like comparison shots but to focus on my making of image. I am current also far from Shanghai...
So now you are accusing me of not having taken the 6x8cm film images that I have posted on the forum?
Sorry, perhaps I should have phrased that it would be interesting to view a quality shot made with your MFDB ?
I like the color shades of the rocks and transition in the sky. Really shows the fine gradations of colors the back picks up. How much processing?
I tend to get amused when some posters, including - again - Anders, refuse to acknowledge the value of stitching, seemingly only to protect their dear feeling that the camera they own is the device delivering the best image quality in the world.
Nope and absolute not, my own camera is only a tool
and not my love affair. It helps me making images. The photographer makes the image. Thus way you describe me is complete incorrect.
I do value stitched images, but flat stitching which is simpler - and better. Same, that is also a tool. Yet the OP asked of MFDB and has received a long discussion on what was not that question... including numerous posts arguing rotation stitching... and dslr instead... Notably that seem not what was asked...
Regarding pixel quality, I actually think pixels are created equal. I would not be able to tell a single pixel shot with an early model canon Ixus from a IQ180 pixel. A pixel is just a number.
Ehh... so an iPhone pixel collects same info as other pixels on sensors ? Obvious no.
The enclosed image is an example of that. Field of view here is around 180 degrees, horizontally.
I would argue is an example of curvature of landscape in image which to my eye is disturbing...
Replacing a sensor glass costs about €1000+VAT, a little variation depending on how much the middle-man (dealer) wants.
Per what I was told replacing ALL
except the sensor costs little more. The sensor is the most expensive part. The disadvantage with Phase One backs compared to Leaf is that Phase One backs need to go back to factory... many repairs can be made by a qualified agent to a Leaf back which makes them cheaper to repair.
Hassy I do not know.
... I would guess many, possibly even most MFD systems don't even see outdoor conditions at all. Some surely do, but the statistics would be skewed because so many are nicely treated. The older backs with open fan vents and external batteries are quite obviously not designed for tough conditions, but this seems to be better with the latest backs.
You would benefit to search the forums for durability of Leaf backs with vents and external batteries. Your assumption is complete wrong. They are extremely durable, but no... Leaf did not make YouTube videos of freezing them, baking them, parking car on them, dropping from balloon or having elephant stamp on them. After all... I believe few photographers use their gear in such ways...
For what it is worth, I travel extensive with my gear, across Asia and to Europe... if I had any doubts to durability of Leaf back I would not use it. My first travel with brand new Leaf back was to dusty India.