Hello, I wonder why noone has asked for the very visible traces of moiree in the picture. Around the "haus" writing on the left side of the pic, then at the "e" of "rainEr" (watersign) in the tiles of the roof and in various other places. Looks the same as in my 5d pictures. Then the trees in the lower left of the pic have a certain painterly" look, in my opinion.
In general on a pixel level (100% view) I think the file quality is not very clean. It was ISO 50, so I am a bit surprised, also because this is already downsized if I understood correctly...
Sure, it is a very detailed picture, but I dont find the quality particulary convincing. It is 24MP, not 39 after all....
Sorry for playing the devils advocate...
. one point behind the others...
1 i dont find moiree at the points you are referring too. in other little details i might find some, but not there. further: moiree is - in opposition to artefactes - a physical law, if the lense exceeds the resolution limit of the sensor. you just can avoid it in using a unsharper lense or stopping down the lense for using its defraction unsharpness ( which is not so easy with the HR lenses for the little diffraction they show ), or putting a strong AA filter in front of the sensor.
the 5d has - in opposite to the 1ds2 - a weak AA filter, therefore this camera can show moiree, the 1ds2 (nearly) never show moirees , for me this is not an advantage of the 1ds2, its for my purposes a weak point of its design . fashion or clothes shooters might have here another opinion because it can be a pain to remove moirees from clothes,- but in landscape or also in architecture it rarely is very difficult to remove. so i prefere the sharper image, which shows moirees in some places, than the softer one which has not. ofcourse this mf systems are far away from any point and shoot solution,- the canons are not far away from that, and in someway they are even perfect p+s cameras.
2. i think what you describe as "painterly look" is wind, cause some parts of the trees in the left corner are moving.
3. it is 24mp for cropping some sky and some foreground. the sensor has 33mp and the image is not downsampled, its cropped- one big advantage of the new sensors.
4. i cannot find the things around the "E" .
5. there are some , little purple fringings around some roofs. this could have been removed by me in photoshop desaturating the magenta colors in this zones, but i have let the image nearly "rough" edited. except some ( mild ) sharpening, retouching of the cranes and raising up the shadows.
6. the 5D is a very good camera- i like it more than the 1ds2,- cause it is sharper for its weaker AA design. but it has at least two big points where the e75 and similar chips are way in front:
one is that the resolution of the e75 is 2,5 times more.
second is that the dynamic range is higher with the mf sensor. you are wrong if you think the 5d image would look in this image even similar in this shadows. the foreground is very dark. it was seconds before the sun disappeared, the towers still had some sunlight and the foreground is completely in shade. the 5d would have here much more noise in the shadows,- and some more in the sky also. ( i allways have problems to have really smooth skies with the 35mm sensors - they all show noise in monochrome regions,- maybe except the alsides hated kodak slr cameras in its iso6 mode ).
7. cannt speak about the mamiya, but i have also the e22 which use the 22mp dalsa sensor also,- and ofcourse this back is very good,- so why not the mamiya?,- in this light conditions at least the e22 will deliver very similar quality, just 22 than 33mp. the advantages of the 33 sensor are others ( higher iso- much better reproduction of all tungsten sources ).
and as aon said, ypou cannt compare this london shot wiith this image,- the motif is too different,- but i agree that the mamiya can make pretty good pictures if the photographer is knowing what he does.
8. some other poster commented the price of the 28HR. yes, it is expensive. but it is also very good,- at least for architecture. its the onliest real wide lense which i can still shift . i sue it without center filter even wide open,- although it has its falloff also but not too much not to be compensated by white reference shots without showing too much noise than in the corners.
in interior i shoot 50% with it.... when i got it i also had doubts about the price/wide-angle factor compared with the 24xl..... but now i think its a "must" for my system and the shift way is very practical for me.
9. about the quality: print it out if you want ,- i think it looks great printed at every size you will need ever.