My preference also goes to the 22mp back. But since I'm using the D3x + zeiss lenses + raw developer + careful photoshoping combination, I really am convinced that the gap is way too close for keeping or investing in a 'small' MFDB system. Too many drawbacks that can only be balanced by a real resolution difference or specific need.
My advice to Paul would be to avoid low resolution MFDB but instead go for high-end backs or stay with DSLR.
One has to live with a MFD system for a little time to make clear competitive determinations as to over-all quality assertions. Same for any high end DSLR.
Here are my experiences with both high-end 35mm DSLRs and MFD used concurrently ... for what they are worth to those considering adding MFD to their capabilities: Forgive the long post ... wedding season is coming to a close and I have time on my hands ... :ROTFL:
I know the D3X very well ... I used one for 20 wedding shoots with AFS Nano coated lenses, and just about all of the Zeiss ZF optics before moving to the Sony A900 to take advantage of that Zeiss look, but in AF, and the Sony's color right out of the camera. Processing up to 1,000 images a weekend gives you a clear insight as to image qualities and performance aspects. Prior to that, weddings were done with a Canon 1DsMKIII and all L lenses ... along with some adapted Leica R and Zeiss/Contax lenses including the Zeiss 50/1.2 and 85/1.2. Anniversary models.
I also have lived with a broad range of MFD gear concurrent with the above high-end 35mm DSLR cameras. These included a full Hasselblad 203FE system coupled with a CFV/16 square digital back, a Mamiya AFD system with a couple of different Leaf Aptus backs which I upgraded from 22 meg to a 33 meg Leaf Aptus 75s ... on to the Hasselblad H system ranging from 22 meg H2D, to H3D/31-II and H3D/39-II to my current H4D/40 and CF/39 Multi-Shot on a H2F.
People making a decision today need not go through the upgrade paths that we early adopters did with MFD. They can benefit from the experience of those who went before them when determining what level of MFD will provide the most distance from 35mm DSLRs available now and in the next few years.
The primary difference between the two types of capture systems in terms of image quality (not handling and performance) is that the 35mm DSLRs are at best 14 bit CMOS capture ... where the MFDs are 16 bit CCD capture,
and the old competitive stand-by "real estate". It isn't just meg count, it's more about pure data captured, and by what, on what sized sensor. MFDs are also usually less filtered captures compared to 35mm DSLRs which are trying to be everything to everyone with ultra high ISO performance in a relatively tiny pixel packed confined space ... the more meg these DSLRs go to, the more minuscule the pixel size will become. To date, that has usually resulted in even more filtered images.
My standard advice to anyone considering MFD is to "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's". In other word's do not compromise in your choice to select a "jack of all trades and master of none". If it takes time to do that ... allow yourself the time. Patience is a virtue.
If your needs are diverse:
I'd select a 35mm DSLR dedicated to performance and high ISO captures which they do better than most anything out there. For example, a Nikon D700 or more capable Nikon D3S Full frame with fat pixels and mind-boggling ISO performance, speed of capture and lightening quick AF ... add a few carefully selected optics to enhance those performance characteristics. "Render unto Nikon, that which is Nikon's" :thumbup: (Or Canon's if that's your preference).
For pure image quality go MFD. In today's marketplace MFD development and turn over has opened up terrific opportunities for those looking for ultra high image quality. As rarified gear comes on the market like the 60 and 80 meg MFD backs, highly capable MFD cameras become available at or below the cost of a high-end 35mm DSLR. I just sold a H3D/39-II with 4 lenses for under $14K. That means the camera was less than a D3X body alone.
New H3D-II/31's are now under $10K. One need not wait for 35mm DSLRs to get to 30+ meg ... previous MFDs are already there in much larger sensor sizes that 35mm DSLRs will never get to, ever. "Render unto MFD that which is MFD's" :thumbs:
I'd also strongly advise NOT relying on post processing to correct the ...
"Master of none" deficiencies in a system.
Post should enhance and be dedicated to that which the system is a master of. It is very difficult, boring and tedious to artificially fix images in post ... and most people are pretty bad at it despite claims to the contrary.
-Marc