the point is that everybody shoots differently and everybody wants different results...all the backs can give you decent results, but one might be the most suitable for your look/what you want...so you can look at all the files you want, it will tell you that all DMF backs give you great resolution, great color and a generally better file then a DSLR...
edmund: i actually looked at the aptus files on the leaf website, downloaded them and played with them in different converters...i actually went back to my own older valeo files, because i just did not like what i got from these files...none matched a situation i would like to have seen or i would shoot in....i could not believe how much better i liked my old valeo files....does not mean the aptus files are bad...they just did not match how i shoot...
the only time i ever got files that represented what i really wanted to see was years ago, when i asked for and received a DVD from imacon with files that came from settings i could have shot in...i did not like the way the files handled color....went with a valeo instead...tried the H2D some time later and it confirmed my first impression of imacon files...but i could really get a good idea of what to expect...
the files michael has on his DVD are completely useless to me...not only because there is no skintone, there is very little shadow with detail in it...and i know that there is no problem with resolution with any of the backs....
for me comparing backs is fairly easy, i can put them on a camera in a store and shoot the salesperson under neon lights, it will give me a good reference point, because sometimes i shoot just like that...
i think that the back makers can't win, because no matter how much they put out there, it won't make everybody happy....the worst nightmare is that people, who have never worked with (sometimes) very sophisticated software, that takes months to really fully understand and get used to, simply butcher these files, try different converters and base their decision on that....
someone here said they don't understand why people are so stingy with their files....what i don't understand is why anyone would want to see what i shoot and make their decision based on that....that is crazy to me....stingy is to not go out and rent the backs for a day to actually make a desicion you can feel good about! plus, if you are a serious buyer, i don't see why a dealer would not want to give you a demo...even better....go to NY and check them all out at photoexpo...
all the technical data is easy to get a hold of, all the nuances, the looks are what makes the investment worth the cost! and that you can't judge from someone else's file!
just because soandso shoots with thisandthat does not mean it will work for you....
there is an quote (don't know who said it): only mad dogs and helmut newton go outside at noon....it worked for him...nothing has changed, film/digital it is just a tool, and to get the look you want, you can read all the comparisons and tests, in the end you have to get your hands dirty.....
a couple of months ago leaf released a pdf with a test they did comparing their backs with phase backs...i haven't seen that pdf in a while, i guess it got pulled...was fun to read and look at though...you would not believe it, the leaf files won every single comparison! what a surprise! it was proof that you can do a lot of things to a lot of files to get the results you want....