Hi,
I recently went MFD, admittedly on the low end. What I got was a used Hasselblad V series camera with a P45+ back. I am quite happy that combo. On the other hand I don't know if I see a lot of benefits to MFD. My investment in the camera and lenses was something like 15000$US. Normally I am shooting with a Sony Alpha 99 and a few zoom lenses.
A modern camera like Phase One, Hasselblad H-series or Rollei of course offers AF and better integration.
Getting to the images, I see a significant gain in resolution over my Sony Alpha 99, but I guess it corresponds to the 24MP vs. 39 MP difference. Other than that , I feel that the there is not a lot of difference in image quality. I am pretty sure that the Sony has better shadow detail. The Sony also has live view and no moving mirror.
Personally, I have quite a few issues with aliasing (both color and monochrome), but for most shooters it doesn't seem to be a problem. Stopping down to f/16 seems to take care of that issue.
An MFDB can be used on both on an SLR-type body, a view camera or a technical camera, that is a great feature.
I have no Nikon D800/D800E or Sony Alpha 7r, so I cannot compare the P45+ to a 36 MP 135 format camera. From what I have seen I would expect some small advantage in resolution for the MF option.
But resolution may not be so important. It is nice but I would guess it is seldom needed. I am not sure it really matters, because 24 MP is quite enough, and I honestly feel that 12 MP may also be quite enough, mostly. It depends on your needs.
It has been said that modern lenses for Hasselblad H and the newer lenses for the Phase One are much better than the V-series lenses for the Hasselblad. Many DSLR-s may also be challenged in lens quality. Again, it depends on your needs.
You can buy a Nikon D800 with a D600 as backup and half a dozen very good lenses for the price I paid for my used equipment, new MFD stuff comes at a higher price.
No question, high end MFD has quite a lot more resolution and in all probability some very good lenses. But it is a lot money. Again, it depends on your needs.
I have published a few images (with raw files) from my P45+ and there are also some comparisons with my Sony Alpha 99.
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Sampleshttp://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples2http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples3http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/MFDB_VS_DSLR/http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/MFDB_VS_DSLR2/Two articles about the experience I had with MFD:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/76-my-medium-format-digital-journeyhttp://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/77-two-months-of-mfd-looking-backWould I buy into MFD again? No, I don't think so, to little benefits for the cost.
Will I keep the MFD kit? Probably, I actually enjoy it a lot!
Best regards
Erik
The undercurrent here looks to be saying MFDB is not worth it. The difference between DSLR and MFDB was once defended to the death, now I get the feeling the D800 gets the nod.
Not that the MF is not better, but more the difference is of little practical value compared with the extra outlay.
I don't mention it as detractor from the value of the MFDB, I come at it as someone that is doing the sums on a P65+ kit, every couple of years I go through this. Wondering if the difference would make a difference, wether a MFDB would add or subtract from my bottom line, that and a desire to have MF again.
I've never used MF digital only DSLR, film days it was the reverse, I still prefer the MF way of working, but I need more than that to justify the cost.
I'm using the 1DX after the 1DsmkII and III, I'm very impressed, yet I still hanker after a MFD system.