Well, Kevin and I spent yesterday with the new back and my Sony grabbing some interiors of really beautiful spaces. It wasn't an ideal test, as neither of us had the lenses that you would really want to use with this back for shooting architecture.
I've also had a look at the tech cam tests on GetDPI and was glad to see those.
I'm going to do a write-up over the next few days with images, but wanted to drop my initial thoughts. The Sony holds up decently against the digital back, decently. I've always known that the A7r files we're not as pretty but felt that they could be worked in post to get where I needed them. When you start pulling up shadows, however, The Phase really seems to shine and exhibits less noise. It also has better color, micro-contrast, DR, and sharpness out of the box.
I don't have any great wides left from my tech cam kit but still had this Rodie apo-sironar digital 45mm kicking around so I used that for both these shots. I didn't employ any movements, because I didn't feel the lens would hold up to it.
So, you can definitely get the nicest files out of the digi-back. It is, however, way less convenient to work with and from what I've seen, there will be less shifting available than there was with my IQ260... no matter what lenses you buy. I'd really love to make this back work for me, but I just don't know if I can live with less movements. As a 20+ year veteran of professional architectural photography, I'm beginning to feel like my dream system may never exist.
More to come...
IMHO
-CB
Both images on the MF2, Rodie 45mm, f/11, 2s, base settings with 50/50 hilight shadow recovery (just for yucks)
The Phase feels sharper, but focus could have been off a touch on the Sony, so nothing conclusive there.