Technical Pan was supplied in 35mm as well as larger formats. The 35mp measurement is in 24x36mm format.
High-acutance, high-resolution imaging in 24x36mm is old, old, old. We already know what it looks like. The advantage of the digital sensor is having such high resolution in color.
We are discusing between canon 35mm DLSR platfoms that has nothing to do what you are talking about. Yours is not the same DSLR platform and i agree with you about the transparent IQ in multiple platforms as you just mentioned
abqnmusa wrote:
I am just surprised how much the 5D Mark II & 5D images look the same.
Canon would be very happy with such customer statements, actually see it as a compliment.
They succeeded to capture the essence of the original 5D, which most agreed was very good, and added some elements that extend the creative range.
I'd buy the 5D2 at once, but decided (after doing a full 360) that the original 5D is still enough* camera for me to away either the next generation or at least a substantial price drop before jumping the gun.
Ruy
(*although I could definitely make very good use of the higher ISO and resolution, LV and HD video less so, it still is a matter of cost vs gain)
I know I'm late to the party and just looked in but I *guessed* right about the cameras used though as others have pointed out, the 85L will pummel that lens. Those MP's are very handy when magazine editors want lots of cropability (is that a word?) and you want to print large but for general use the 10.1 mp on my 1D3 are more than enough.
Maybe it's the RAW convertors but I swear the 1D3 images are just a little more 'rounder' and saturated. I like both, just an observation
and i agree with you about the transparent IQ in multiple platforms as you just mentioned 
