great, I'll look forward to it.
My thoughts on the test of MFDB in Proffsfoto magazine.
The test is between the products; Phase one P45/P30/P21, Hasselblad CFH-39, Sinar eMotion 75 and Leaf Aptus 75/65. All on a Hasselblad H2 with 120 macro lens.
Firstly I think the test is slightly flawed, it does not take into consideration the build, screen, battery, and other issues besides image quality, yet does take speed both tethered and untethered into consideration as well as conversion speed in software. This in my opinion gives the Leaf system and the Hassellblad system a disadvantage, where the Leaf has a gorgeous screen and can shoot to a firewire disk/batterypowered disk, and the hasselblad has battery advantages (on H-systems), optical correction advantages as well as shooting direct to firewire HD's. (Im not familiar with all these backs, so sinar user dont shoot me for not giving you credit for something... )
Basically the test shows little or no image advantage and gives all the backs the same score with the exeption of the P21 (because of lower resolution.) This is something I expected, the chips are not "that" different. The Phase systems pull away a little on longer exposures, with sinar and hasselblad runner ups, and the leafs last. In the "noise at high iso" department, both the kodak sensor models with 39 mpix are marked down a little together with the sinar, and leaf in the middle, with the P30/21 on top. This is a surprise to me, i would have thought high pixel count is an advantage here... a bit like old medium format film against 35mm...
When shooting "against/into" the light, all come out the same.
Differences are mainly in the speed department, here the hasselblad lags behind, with the P45 and Leaf 75 slightly ahead of it. P21 wins hands down with the rest in the middle. The last part is conversion tests from software, here the Leaf 75/eMotion75/H-CFH-39 are behind, with P21 ahead, and the others in the middle.
As I stated, I think the test is slightly flawed, yet it states something we are all aware of, things like software, build, compatibility with _your_ system, accessories, price, dealer availability in you neighbourhood, etc. are key to your choice, where image quality is not the main factor for measuring difference.
The new tools on the block (p+backs, aptus "s" backs, hass-apo-corr, etc.) is not evaluated. I think choice of back more and more comes down to the differences between these, and my very personal guess would be Aptus for speed, P+ for high iso/build, and CFH/H3D for straight lines/digital corr/adaptor plate (more with certain lenses....) (The sinar may well have some particular strengths, I havent looked at it outside of the test in Proffsfoto...)
For the record I'm a CFH-39 user, and would not change my initial choice, based on dealer availability, price, battery, storage, and upgrade path. I'm not affiliated or sponsored in any way.