Ulrik, I think the small amount of market potential precludes more advanced development of the CFV digital system. We're probably lucky Hasselblad threw us a bone with the 16 meg CVF back.
Andrew, how do you use the Aptus 22? Do you have to manually rotate the back for portrait orientation? BTW, I had the Aptus 22 in Mamiya mount for my RZ ( the back rotates), and 645 AFDII ... but moved to the 75 recently for the higher ISOs.
Most professional photographers I've had the opportunity of working with in the US use Imacons and Phase One backs and a few Sinar. None yet used a V system, but either a 645 or mounted the back on a sliding mount for use with a view camera ... or both.
Jurgen, I'm in a rare position of owing and using all 5 variations you listed.
IMO, the way to go depends entirely on your creative needs, amount of shooting, and variety of applications.
If you are a versatile professional or advanced amateur, I'd say (ddd) but include some AF HC lenses also. Most pros I've work with use 645s with backs from Imacon or Phase One that also mount on view cameras for studio work with tilts and shifts. None I've worked with to date use a V camera.
For most applications other than a deep need for wide work, the CFV back is the most user friendly solution to go direct digital with the V series cameras. For users of the 200 series cameras it is the only practical solution ... which is why I got a CFV ... it works on both camera systems.
I want to offer a caveat for those thinking about moving into MF digital capture. It is not for the faint of heart, the financially frugal, or the technically challenged.
All these backs require a steep learning curve, (the least steep is the CFV, but still isn't all that easy) unless you are inclined to understand the workings and ideocyratic ways of computers ... and are willing to make a lot of investment in money as well as time.
As I mentioned in an above post, these backs are not without their issues. My Aptus 22 and 33 meg, and Imacon 22 and 39 meg camera backs have suddenly decided to screw up ... on occasion due to user error, but just as frequently on their own. As usual, when gremlins attack, they do so at the most inopportune times. In some cases with no warning from the LCD read out which looks okay .... but the file is garbage. You have to learn a whole new trouble shooting routine, and better have a direct line to tech help.
This is fresh on my mind right now because I fired up my H2D/39 this AM and it said "Invalid Calibration" and produces no usable file at all. It worked fine last time I used it. Even my local tech guy is perplexed, and has to call in the heavy Imacon guns for a solution. Meanwhile I have $30,000. paper weight sitting here.
Lastly, there is the Scanner route: IMO, this is a very valid way to produce top notch images to work on in the digital domain. It's a slower way, but for many that isn't the issue, the issue is preserving the look of the films that they love.
If I didn't have such a broad variety of needs from wedding work, to table top, to lifestyle, to portraiture, to handheld location ... my choice would be the V system cameras, film backs, CFV digital back, and a decent MF scanner. For the price of a CF/22, you can get the CFV back and an Imacon 848 scanner (maybe less if you can find a demo 848). Best of both worlds IMO. Need wide stuff from a 40 or SWC? ... shoot film and scan it.
