Clive, I did answer you. In detail. Days ago.
So there was no iceiness intended. I even put a smilely face with my comment on your Gallery up-loads...including a positive score and glowing comment on your "Angler" photograph.
Today, you have taken my early posts out of context to serve your argument. But I think everyone here knows that I was initially mad about the lack of support from Contax concerning poor power, RAW developer problems, pricing, and silence from Contax on tech support. Many people may also recall that Irakly tutored me in the use of the camera at my studio. I solved the power problem with 4 battery inserts, 2000 Mih batteries in place of the crappy ones from Contax, and purchased better rapid chargers. Plus Irakly showed me that the J-Peg files were as good as the RAW or better. Not to mention that the camera is quite fast when shooting J-pegs, so the small buffer is now a non-issue. Lastly, I "fixed" the price problem through my dealer.
I still do not think much of Contax support, for it wasn't them who helped me use their own product to greater effect. It was people like Irakly and others from this forum. (Thanks Dirk).
Since my fairly long private e-mail to you was lost or whatever, I'll post a short version here.
You claimed to be able to spot a digital shot in the flesh or in printed form from a mile away. This must drive you nuts as a vast majority of all editorial and commercial work is now digital capture, including automobile work here in Detroit, package goods from Chicago and NY, and fashion from NY and LA.
In your e-mail to me you assumed I was a wedding photographer by profession and that my clients would accept lesser digital quality. I am NOT in that profession. I am an Executive Creative Director for an ad agency doing package goods advertising for an international food giant; financial institution collateral work, and...blah, blah, blah. The point is that quality IS at issue, not just costs.
What I've learned in the ad profession is that talent and experience make a huge difference with digital post work. I am pretty good at PhotoShop, etc., but my Art Directors are wizards by comparison. Most everything I've learned I've gleened from them. Those Art Directors and our 30 year veteran Print Production Manager are the ones that approved digital capture for all of our work. Everything we have done for the last 2 years has been digital capture, including bill boards, posters, huge backlit Dura-trans, and on-screen movie house advertising. We have 8' laminated prints of our clients products lining the halls of our agency that were from digital shots. Fact is, because almost all printing is now digital, digital capture provides equal or better quality. Film gave us major problems with such huge digital enlargements due to grain. Perhaps because Interpolation programs work smoothly with digital files, while exaggerating the grain with film scans. We actually had to dumb down the film scans, or use grain reduction programs to lessen the hightened grain...at a loss of quality.
Now to the issue, YES I agree that digital images and film images differ in look and feel.
(Most of the time, but not always). I do not agree it is a quality issue, or a detail issue. Properly post processed, a digital file IS high quality. Yet there is a look and feel from film that touches an emotional cord. It's why movie makers are slow to go digital. It's why I still prefer to shoot B&W shots with a Leia M and film, (although, I must admit the Contax ND is a close second for that kind of work).
As to your other assertions, sorry, I don't get your point. The Canon is faster than any other DSLR available. It replaced the Nikon D1-X system, not the Contax. And I now also use the ND at weddings on occassion when AF speed isn't critical. As Irakly can confirm, I do not carry either Canon for street shooting...I ALWAYS use the Contax ND. It is also my camera of choice for travel when I do not want to carry a M7 and a bag of film through the x-ray hassel (see the bunch of Gallery shots from a recent trip to LA to shoot a TV commercial for Unilever-Best Foods).