Hmmm...I hadn't intended to reignite this debate but others have pitched in...so...
I will take this chance to address you original post:
"The Leaf Aptus-II delivers stunning, film-like quality that rivals any capture device available in the industry, regardless of resolution"
How is that not true? This is a statement about image quality, not features. Leaf Aptus is targeted mainly at studio shooters. High ISO and long exposures are not basic features for that demo.
To me, a statement as bold as "any capture device available in the industry, regardless of resolution" leaves no wriggle room for exceptions like the ones you gave.
"The industry" refers to the camera industry, not a niche segment like cameras targeted at studio shooters, and "capture" refers to any usage that cameras are commonly put to, which includes shooting at higher ISO and longer exposures.
You can also fault their camera for not having: the best auto focus, the best shooting speed, the best video capability, auto-ISO, JPEG in camera - there are many many features that exist in a Canon 1DX that are missing from a Leaf camera - that does not make Canon the better camera, or the quoted statement untrue.
I had no complaint about any of those other features, as they were not relevant to image quality.
I guess there is an undecided argument that when you mention "image quality" - are you talking about image quality under the best circumstances, or the worst circumstances, or some kind of average between the two. To me it makes sense that it is measured under the best circumstances, unless specified otherwise.
If the quality can vary by so much depending on the "circumstances", then it is beholden to at least specify what those best circumstances are. I'd also like to see an appraisal of quality/performance for less than ideal circumstances. For example, in the EU, when a car advert flaunts its fuel efficiency performance, the headline "extra-urban" figure is accompanied by a note specifying something like "at sustained 90 kph", and there is also a second, less impressive figure given for "urban cycle" performance, and a third figure, "combined", which is a distance-weighted average of the other two. Maybe we need an EU regulation for cameras/sensors
"quality that rivals any capture device available in the industry" - Copy from 2010, still as far as image quality alone, I don't think it has become untrue. They are not saying it's better than everyone else, just that it is on the front line with the other "bests".
True, "rivals" doesn't necessarily imply "exceeds".
"unsurpassed 12 f-stops of dynamic range" - As was pointed out here, the original copy was written in 2010 when it was indeed the best dynamic range in the market. Careless copy paste and neglect to effectively review copy before it goes out. I'm pretty sure they didn't release that statement after careful review and with intent to deceive. Still, I guess this is the one thing you can really fault them here.
Erik has already covered this - there were other cameras in (and long prior to) 2010 that had surpassed 12 stops of DR.
Actually, I have previously posted here, that where MFD generally has a distinct edge is not necessarily in the quantity
of DR (although the new IQ2's seem to be back on top), but rather the quality
in S/N terms along the range of stops covered by the DR at base ISO. No-one seems to have picked up on this point...maybe because there is a lack of understanding of noise models.
"the only back with an internal rotating sensor" - I was not aware of other backs with *internal* rotating sensor. I know on cameras like GX680 or RZ67 you can rotate the backs, but what other backs have internal rotation, without using the camera's rotation or taking the back out?
I think you missed my point here. What I said was that Leaf seemed to have forgotten that they themselves
had another back with an internal rotating sensor!
Usage of words like "stunning", "unrivaled", "unsurpassed" - This is a common disease of Israeli marketing. They've latched on the the hyperbole way of creating marketing statements, and it's very hard to convince them that sometimes a reserved statement can make a better impression.
Can't comment on Israeli product marketing...but for a small country, they do have an admirable indigenous entrepreneurial tech sector, which produces such products to market!